Sample Discovery Order; Sample Pretrial Scheduling Order; Sample Order on Trial Instructions

=== Sample Discovery Order ===

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT LAUDERDALE DIVISION GENERAL ORDER ON DISCOVERY OBJECTIONS AND PROCEDURES This matter is before this Court sua sponte. In order to efficiently and fairly resolve discovery disputes, the parties are hereby notified that the following rules apply to discovery objections before this Court. In addition, the procedure for filing discovery motions is set forth below. This procedure does not apply to any discovery motion currently pending before the undersigned, but shall apply to any motion filed after the entry of this Order. I. Objections A. Specific Objections All objections to discovery requests must be specific. The parties shall not make generalized, vague, or boilerplate objections. Nonspecific objections do not comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or the Local Rules and will not be sustained by this Court. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(b)(4) (“The grounds for objecting to an interrogatory must be stated with specificity.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(b)(2)(B) (“For each item or category, the response must either state that inspection and related activities will be permitted as requested or state an objection to the request, including the reasons.” (emphasis added ; S.D. Fla. L.R. 26.1(g) B. Objections Based Upon Vague, Overly Broad, and Unduly Burdensome Requests Objections that state that a discovery request is Avague, overly broad, or unduly burdensome@ are, standing alone, meaningless and will be found meritless by this Court. 1 See Josephs v. Harris Corp., 677 F.2d 985, 992 (3d Cir. 1982) (“[T]he mere statement by a party that the interrogatory was ‘overly broad, burdensome, oppressive and irrelevant’ is not adequate to voice a successful objection to an interrogatory.”). In accordance with Part I.A of this Order, a party objecting on these grounds must explain the specific and particular way in which a request is vague, overly broad, or unduly burdensome. Additionally, if a party believes that a request is vague, the party shall attempt to obtain clarification prior to objecting on this ground. C. Objections Based Upon Scope If there is an objection based upon an unduly broad scope, such as timeframe or geographic location, discovery should be provided as to those matters within the scope that is not disputed. For example, if discovery is sought nationwide for a ten-year period, and the responding party objects on the grounds that only a five-year period limited to activities in the State of Florida is appropriate, the responding party shall provide responsive discovery falling within the five-year period as to the State of Florida. D. Objections Based Upon Irrelevant Requests and Requests Not Reasonably Calculated to Lead to Admissible Evidence In accordance with Part I.A of this Order, an objection that a discovery request is irrelevant and/or not reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence must include a specific explanation describing why the request lacks relevance and/or why the information sought is not reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence. The parties are reminded that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allow for broad discovery that need not be necessarily admissible at trial. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1); Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders, 437 U.S. 340, 350–51 (1978). 2 E. Formulaic Objections Followed by an Answer The parties shall not recite a formulaic objection followed by an answer to the request. Unfortunately, it has become common practice for a party to object on the basis of any of the above reasons, but then state Anotwithstanding the above@ and nevertheless respond to the discovery request, subject to or without waiving such objection. This type of objection and answer preserves nothing and serves only to waste the time and resources of the parties and this Court. Further, such practice leaves the requesting party uncertain as to whether the question actually has been fully answered or whether only a portion of the question has been answered. F. Objections Based Upon Privilege In accordance with Part I.A of this Order, generalized objections asserting attorney–client privilege or work-product doctrine are also insufficient. Local Rule 26.1 requires objections based upon privilege to identify the specific nature of the privilege being asserted, the nature and subject matter of the communication at issue, and the sender and receiver of the communication and their relationship to each other, inter alia. The parties are instructed to carefully review this rule and to refrain from objections such as, AObjection. This information is protected by attorney-client and/or work-product privilege.@ If a general objection based on privilege is made without attaching a proper privilege log, the objection may be deemed to have been waived. See S.D. Fla. L.R. 26.1 II. Procedure The following procedures do not relieve parties of the requirements of any Federal Rule of Civil Procedure or Local Rule except as noted below. 3 A. Meet and Confer Counsel must actually confer (either in person or via telephone) and engage in a genuine effort to resolve discovery disputes before filing discovery motions. B. Discovery Motions If, after conferring, the parties are unable to resolve their discovery disputes without Court intervention, the moving party, after obtaining permission from Judge Hunt’s Chambers, shall file a motion requesting appropriate relief. The motion shall not exceed five pages in length. The moving party may attach as exhibits to the motion any materials relevant to the discovery dispute. For example, if the dispute concerns interrogatories, the interrogatory responses (which restate the interrogatories) should be filed with an indication of which interrogatories remain in dispute. The movant shall include in the motion a certificate of good faith that complies with S.D. Fla. L.R. 7.1(a)(3) and that specifically indicates the efforts that were made to resolve the dispute prior to filing the motion. C. Responses to Motions The nonmoving party shall file a response to the motion, which is not to exceed five pages in length. The responding party may also attach as exhibits any materials relevant to the discovery dispute. The moving party shall file a reply to the response, which is not to exceed five pages in length. The moving party may only attach to the reply exhibits that are relevant to rebut the response. The parties shall notify chambers as soon as practicable if they resolve some or all of the issues in dispute. The Court will set a discovery conference on the issues 4 presented if this Court deems it appropriate. D. Time for Filing Pursuant to Local Rule 26.1(g), the motion shall be filed within thirty (30) days of from identified dates. The response shall be filed on or before the fifth business day following the date the motion was filed. The reply, if any, shall be filed on or before the third business day following the filing of the response. The time period for filing a response or reply will begin to run on, and shall include, the first business day following the filing of the motion or response. For example, if the motion is filed on a Monday, the response shall be filed by the following Monday. If the response is filed on a Friday, the reply shall be filed by the following Wednesday. For the purposes of calculating time per this Court’s discovery Order, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(d) does not apply. To the extent that the docket reflects a different time or date to respond or reply, the timeframes in this Order are controlling. E. Expenses, Including Attorney’s Fees This Court reminds the parties and counsel that if the motion is granted, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(a)(5) requires this Court to award to the moving party all reasonable expenses incurred in making the motion, including attorney’s fees, absent an exception. THIS COURT MAY DECLINE TO CONSIDER ANY FILING THAT DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THIS ORDER. DONE AND ORDERED at Fort Lauderdale, Florida this ____ day of ____ 202_. 5

=== Sample Pretrial Scheduling Order ===

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT LAUDERDALE DIVISION Case No. PLAINTIFF v. DEFENDANT ___________________________________/ [SAMPLE] PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER THIS CAUSE came before this Court upon the parties’ consent to jurisdiction to authorize the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge to conduct further proceedings in the case, including trial, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), ECF Nos. __, ___, and was transferred to the undersigned by The Honorable ___________, United States District Court Judge, on ___________, ECF No. __. A status conference was held on _____________, at which time counsel for the parties were directed by the undersigned to confer regarding proposed pretrial scheduling deadlines and trial dates. Having been advised of counsel’s scheduling agreements, this Court sets forth the following Order concerning pretrial scheduling and procedure. I. Trial Date and Location The case is specially set for trial for the ________ period beginning on ______________. Unless instructed otherwise by subsequent Order, the trial and all other proceedings in this case shall be conducted in Courtroom ____ at the United States Federal Building and Courthouse, 299 East Broward Boulevard, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, 33301. II. Pretrial Deadlines The parties shall adhere to the following deadlines: [DATE] [DATE] [DATE] [DATE] [DATE] [DATE] [DATE] [DATE] [DATE] All motions to amend pleadings or join parties shall be filed. Parties shall file a joint interim status report. See Part III below for further details. Parties shall exchange expert witness summaries or reports. Parties shall exchange rebuttal expert witness summaries or reports. All discovery, completed. including expert witness discovery, shall be All pre-trial motions, including all dispositive motions and Daubert motions (which may include motions to strike experts) shall be filed. Each party is limited to filing one Daubert motion. If all evidentiary issues cannot be addressed in a 20-page memorandum, leave to exceed the page limit will be granted upon a showing of good cause. The parties are reminded that Daubert motions must contain the Local Rule 7.1(a)(3) certification. Parties must have completed mediation and filed a mediation report. Within seven (7) days of mediation, the parties are required to file a mediation report with the Court. joint pre-trial stipulation, proposed Parties shall submit jury instructions and verdict form, or proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law, as applicable, and motions in limine (other than Daubert motions). Each party is limited to filing one motion in limine. If all evidentiary issues cannot be addressed in a 20-page memorandum, leave to exceed the page limit will be granted upon a showing of good cause. The parties are reminded that motions in limine must contain the Local Rule 7.1(a)(3) certification. A pretrial conference will be held at ________ pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16. Each party shall be represented at the pretrial conference and at the meeting required by Local Rule 16.1(d) by the attorney who will conduct the trial, except for good cause shown. 2 III. Settlement If this matter is settled, counsel are directed to inform this Court promptly via telephone 954) 769-5470) and/or email ([email protected]). DONE and ORDERED at Fort Lauderdale, Florida this ____ day of ________________. ___________________________________ PATRICK M. HUNT UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Copies furnished to: All Counsel of Record/Pro Se Parties 3

=== Sample Order on Trial Instructions ===

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT LAUDERDALE DIVISION Case No. PLAINTIFF v. DEFENDANT ___________________________________/ [SAMPLE] ORDER ON TRIAL INSTRUCTIONS This matter is before this Court sua sponte. The Court hereby enters the following Order on Trial Instructions. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows: I. Trial Exhibits All trial exhibits must be pre-marked. Plaintiffs’ exhibits must be marked numerically with the letter “P” as a prefix. Defendants’ exhibits must be marked alphabetically with the letter “D” as a prefix. A list setting out all exhibits must be submitted at the beginning of trial. This list must indicate the pre-marked identification label (e.g., P-1 or D-1) and must also include a brief description of the exhibit. II. Deposition Designations Any party intending to use deposition testimony as substantive evidence must designate by line and page reference those portions in writing. The designations must be served on opposing counsel and filed with the Court fourteen days before the deadline to file the joint pretrial stipulation. The adverse party must serve and file any objections and cross-designations within seven days. The initial party then has seven days to serve and file objections to the cross-designations. III. Jury Instructions and Verdict Form If this case will proceed by jury trial, the parties shall submit their proposed jury instructions and verdict form jointly, although they need not agree on each proposed instruction. Where the parties do not agree on a proposed instruction, that instruction shall be set forth in bold type. Instructions proposed only by Plaintiff shall be underlined. Instructions proposed only by Defendant shall be italicized. Every instruction must be supported by citation to authority. The parties shall use as a guide the Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instruction for Civil Cases, including the directions to counsel contained therein. Proposed jury instructions and verdict form, in typed form, including substantive charges and defenses, shall be submitted to this Court in Microsoft Word format via e-mail to: [email protected]. Instructions for filing proposed documents may be viewed at: http://www.flsd.uscourts.gov. IV. Settlement If this matter is settled, counsel are directed to inform this Court promptly via telephone 954) 769-5470) and/or email ([email protected]). DONE and ORDERED at Fort Lauderdale, Florida this ____ day of ________________. ___________________________________ PATRICK M. HUNT UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE cc: All counsel of record 2