Sample Consent Motion to Extend Discovery Deadlines
Sometimes in litigation the scheduling deadlines sneak up on both parties. Often this is because the lawyers involved are too busy or lazy to push the case forward. But there are some complex cases, like the malpractice claim below, that have too many busy experts to schedule and depose in a relatively short period of time.
ADVANCED RADIOLOGY, PA., et al.
* IN THE
* CIRCUIT COURT
* HOWARD COUNTY
* CASE NO. 13-C-17-111047 MM
* * * * * * * * * * * *
Plaintiff, James Evans, by and through his attorneys, Justin P. Zuber, Rodney M. Gaston and Miller & Zois, LLC, files this "Consent" Motion to Extend the Discovery Deadline and in support thereof states as follows:
- This is a complicated medical malpractice action involving multiple experts and witnesses.
- In fact, there are 15 medical experts between the parties, many of which are out of state.
- Despite the Parties' best efforts, due to scheduling and calendaring difficulties, and due to the number of fact, party and expert witnesses involved in this matter, all depositions have not been completed.
- In particular, it has been difficult scheduling expert witness depositions because of the attorneys' schedules and the witnesses' pre-planned work schedules that include clinical duties and surgery.
- The Parties are working harmoniously to calendar these depositions to take place within the next couple of months.
- Simply stated, the parties need additional time to complete discovery in this complicated medical malpractice case.
- It is for these reasons that the parties request an extension of the following case deadlines: Current Deadline Proposed New Deadline
Discovery Deadline: March 10, 2018 June 10, 2018
Pretrial Statement Drafts: March 19, 2018 June 12, 2018
Final Pretrial Statement: March 26, 2018 June 18, 2018
Pretrial Settlement Conference: April 4, 2018 June 26, 2018
- The current dates for the pretrial on July 9, 2018 and trial on July 30, 2018 will remain the same.
- Granting this Joint Motion will further the interest of justice and fulfill the purpose of the discovery rules, as it will ensure that the Parties appear at trial with a full understanding of the facts and anticipated testimony. Kelch v. Mass Transit Admin., 287 Md. 223, 229 (1980) ("the basic objective in providing for discovery is 'to require disclosure of facts by a party litigant to all of his adversaries, and thereby to eliminate, as far as possible, the necessity of any party to litigation going to trial in a confused or muddled state of mind, concerning the facts that give rise to litigation.")
- The extension of these case deadlines will not affect any other deadlines in this case and will not result in the postponement of the trial which is currently scheduled for July 30, 2018.
- That undersigned counsel contacted all defense counsel of record in this case and all counsel in this case have consented to extending the above referenced deadlines.
WHEREFORE it is respectfully requested that this Honorable Court extend the case deadlines, including the discovery deadline.
Miller & Zois, LLC
Justin P. Zuber, Esq.
Rodney M. Gaston, Esq.
1 South Street, Suite 2450
Baltimore, Maryland 21202
T: (410) 553-6000
F: (844) 712-5151
Client Protection Fund No.: 0812180339
Attorneys for Plaintiff
I, Justin P. Zuber, Esquire, do hereby certify, pursuant to Maryland Rule 1-322.1, that the foregoing pleading does not include any individual's Social Security number, taxpayer identification number or the alpha or numeric characters of a financial or medical account identifier and does not contain "restricted information" as defined in Rule 20-101(f)(1)(B).
Justin P. Zuber, Esq.