discussing factors to be evaluated by courts 10 considering motions to continue trial
How later courts described this case
- discussing factors to be evaluated by courts 10 considering motions to continue trial
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
----oo0oo----
11
12 ERICKA BOHNEL, an individual; NO. 2:18-cv-00081-WBS-
ROSA MARTINEZ, an individual, DMC
13
Plaintiffs,
14
v.
15
JETBLUE AIRWAYS CORPORATION, ORDER RE: PLAINTIFFS’
16 MOTION TO CONTINUE
Defendant. TRIALS
17
18
19
20
21 MICHELLE HILL, an individual; NO. 2:17-cv-01604-WBS-DB
ARIEL EPSTEIN POLLACK, an
22 individual,
23 Plaintiffs,
24 v.
25 JETBLUE AIRWAYS CORPORATION,
26 Defendant.
27
28
1 ----oo0oo----
2 Plaintiffs assert personal injury claims against
3 JetBlue arising out of an August 2016 turbulence incident on
4 JetBlue Airways Flight 429 from Boston Logan International
5 Airport to Sacramento International Airport. (Hill Compl. (Hill
6 Docket No. 1); Bohnel Compl. (Bohnel Docket No. 1).) Liability
7 discovery in Bohnel et al v. Jetblue Airways Corporation (2:18-
8 cv-00081-WBS-DMC) has been consolidated with that in Hill, et al
9 v. Jetblue Airways Corporation (No. 2:17-cv-01604-WBS-DB). (See
10 Bohnel Docket No. 17; Hill Docket No. 26.) Both cases concern
11 the same August 2016 turbulence incident. Presently before the
12 court is plaintiffs’ Motion to Continue Trial Date. (See Bohnel
13 Docket No. 24; Hill Docket No. 30.)
14 Plaintiffs ask this court to shift the trial dates and
15 the discovery deadlines in Hill and Bohnel forward so that they
16 may have time to conduct discovery before trial.1 Defendant does
17 not object to the continuance of the trial dates in Hill and
18 Bohnel.2 (See Response to Pl.’s Mot. to Continue Trial at 2
19
1 The National Transportation Safety Board is currently
20 investigating the August 2016 turbulence incident that gave rise
to plaintiffs’ alleged injuries. (See Luke Decl. Ex 1 (Hill
21
Docket No. 31-1).) As a result, JetBlue is subject to an
22 investigative hold by the Board and JetBlue’s ability to respond
to plaintiffs’ discovery requests is circumscribed by federal
23 regulations. (See id.) Plaintiffs state that the investigative
hold has hampered their ability to conduct discovery and placed
24 the parties in a “holding pattern.” (Mot. to Continue Trial Date
at 5.)
25
2 Confusingly, JetBlue’s Response to Plaintiff’s Motion
to Continue Trial Date indicates that it objects “to the
26
consolidation of the damages trial portion of all four
27 [p]laintiffs’ cases.” (See Response to Pl.’s Mot. to Continue
Trial at 2 (Hill Docket No. 32; Bohnel Docket No. 26).) Given
28 that plaintiffs are moving to continue the trial dates in Hill
1 (Bohnel Docket No. 26; Hill Docket No. 32).)
2 In light of plaintiffs’ diligence in attempting to
3 conduct discovery in a timely manner, the need for a continuance,
4 the lack of objection to the continuance, and the potential
5 prejudice to plaintiffs if their motion is denied, the court will
6 grant plaintiffs’ Motion to Continue Trial. (Bohnel Docket No.
7 24; Hill Docket No. 30.) See United States v. 2.61 Acres of
8 Land, More or Less, Situated in Mariposa Cty., 791 F.2d 666, 671
9 (9th Cir. 1985)(discussing factors to be evaluated by courts
10 considering motions to continue trial).
11 Accordingly, the court modifies the scheduling orders
12 in Hill (Docket No. 26) and Bohnel (Docket No. 17) as follows:
13 Fact discovery completion December 30, 2019.
14 Expert witness disclosure June 8, 2020
15 Rebuttal witness disclosure July 6, 2020
16 Discovery completion deadline August 3, 2020
17 Dispositive motion deadline September 14, 2020
Final pretrial conference October 26, 2020 at
18 1:30 p.m.
Hill Trial January 5, 2021 at
19
9:00 a.m.
20 Bohnell Trial January 20, 2021 at
9:00 a.m.
21
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion to
22
Continue the Trial Date (Hill Docket No. 30; Bohnel Docket No.
23
24) is GRANTED and the dates and deadlines of the Status
24
(Pretrial Scheduling) Order (Bohnel Docket No. 17; Hill Docket
25
No. 26) are modified as described herein.
26
27 and Bohnel, and not to consolidate, the court will ignore
JetBlue’s objections to the consolidation of the trials on the
28 damages issue.
1 | Dated: August 7, 2019 a hho A hh
WILLIAM B. SHUBB
2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
3
4
5
6
,
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28