HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021CV30426 - City Of Fort Collins V. Aaron Million, Jordan Fox-Million; Million Agricultural Investments, Ltd., Arlo Richardson Aka Arlo Lee Richardson; The Pleasant Valley And Lake Canal Ditch Company - 026b - Exhibit A1
DISTRICT COURT, LARIMER COUNTY, STATE OF COLORADO
201 LA PORTE AVENUE, SUITE 100
FORT COLLINS, CO 80521-2761
(970) 494-3500
________________________________________________
Plaintiff(s): City of Fort Collins
v.
Defendant(s): Aaron Million et al.
FOR COURT USE
Case No.: 21CV30426
Courtroom: 5B
CASE PROCEDURE ORDER PURSUANT TO C.R.C.P. 16
COUNSEL MUST READ AND FOLLOW THIS ORDER.
The case file indicates that all parties have been served and have either appeared
or defaulted. The Court declares the case to be at issue as of the date of this order. Most
cases should be tried within one year of being of filing. See CJD 08-05.
The Court orders discovery to commence immediately.
Parties must meaningfully confer as contemplated by Rule 16(b)(3) within 14
days. The Court’s Division Clerk, Alyson Asher, will be emailing the parties to
schedule the case management conference to take place between 35 and 49 days from
today. Both Rule 16(d) and this Court require the conference to be in person. Absent a
motion and good cause shown, the Court will not waive the in person requirement.1 A
trial date will be set at the time of the case management conference. Counsel should
have their calendars available.
A proposed Case Management Order is due no later than 42 days from today or
at least 7 days prior to the Conference. Please use JDF 622.
1 During COVID video appearances through Webex will be held.
DATE FILED: November 15, 2021 8:52 AM
CASE NUMBER: 2021CV30426
Exhibit A
DATE FILED: December 22, 2021 3:48 PM
FILING ID: 6921E6D2B7C51
CASE NUMBER: 2021CV30426
2
Regarding paragraph #6, the Parties must address: 1) the importance of the
issues at stake; 2) the amount in controversy; 3) the parties’ relative access to relevant
information; 4) the parties’ resources; 5) the importance of the discovery in resolving the
issues; and 6) whether the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs the
benefit. See C.R.C.P. Rule 16(b)(6), Rule 26(b)(1).
Regarding paragraph #7, the Parties must address: 1) that settlement was
discussed; 2) the prospects for settlements; and 3) list a proposed deadline for mediation
or other alternative dispute resolution.
Regarding paragraph #14 of JDF 622, the Court “does not” require discovery
motions to be presented orally, without motions or briefs. However, if a party seeks
relief under Rule 37, a motion must be filed.
At any time during the pendency of the case, any party may request additional
case management conferences including brief telephonic conferences if needed.
Please note the 2015 Comment to Rule 12: “The practice of pleading every
affirmative defense listed in Rule 8(c), irrespective of a factual basis for the defense, is
improper under C.R.C.P. 11(a). . . .” To the extent that Rule 12 was not followed in this
case, any affirmative defenses must be re-pled with a factual basis.
If the parties settle the case after trial has been set, the Court will not vacate the
trial until the parties have filed a stipulation to dismiss the case with prejudice. Parties
must seek a Court order to modify any deadline or order. Their stipulations are not
binding upon the Court.
Dated: November 15, 2021. BY THE COURT:
__________________________
Gregory M. Lammons
District Court Judge
Exhibit A