Related Posts
Happy Golu season! .... continued
Bowl Leader
Additional Posts in Litigation & Arbitration
Enthusiast
Best big law firms for white collar defense?
Enthusiast
Does anybody enjoy taking depositions?
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
Stop thinking about it. We have lots of reasons for doing what we do.
What court? Most federal courts don’t want oral argument on an MSJ (grant or deny). I don’t think you should assume anything other than the parties cannot effectively do anything at the pretrial until MSJ is decided. The courts I practice in generally don’t even schedule the pretrial until all dispositive motions are decided.
As a former clerk, this could also mean that the judge has a lot on their plate and they want to clear their courtroom schedule to focus on getting motions off the “6 month list” and/or prepare for another big trial.
But yes, it could mean the MSJ will resolve the matter and no trial is necessary.
I would keep an open mind about what could happen and be mentally prepared for a variety of outcomes.
Facts, or, for example, an emergency motion for injunction came through and you have to set a hearing on that.
All CA federal courts usually always rule on the papers for MSJs in my experience. And it never indicates whether the court intends to grant/deny.
I wouldn’t read too much into it. The court might need more time to consider the MSJ and doesn’t want the parties preparing for the pretrial conference (in the event the MSJ is granted the conference would be pointless)
Coach
Seems unlikely they’d enter judgment on the case without argument. But canceling the pretrial conference is foreboding. Dunno—they point in opposite directions.
Rarely hearings on MSJ. Hearings back things up, not in just your case but ALL our cases.
Check local rules and judge rules. Some courts as a policy put a hold on any pretrial proceedings if you inform them that settlement talks are occurring or if dispositive motions are filed.
Probably at least one of those confusing orders was the judicial assistant or clerk. For example, maybe the judge has the JA set an argument date for all motions just in case, and then the judge decides later (after reviewing the papers) that argument isn’t necessary. But pushing the trial date is a bad sign for plaintiff
The court likely views oral argument as unnecessary because the papers resolve the issues one way or another, definitively. Oral argument would be a waste of time. The majority of SJ decisions are rendered without oral argument. I practice in NY and they don’t schedule oral argument just to put on a good show, there has to be some necessity.