Free Order Referring Case to Magistrate Judge - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut


File Size: 35.6 kB
Pages: 1
Date: December 31, 1969
File Format: PDF
State: Connecticut
Category: District Court of Connecticut
Author: unknown
Word Count: 377 Words, 2,222 Characters
Page Size: 611 x 792 pts
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ctd/9951/163.pdf

Download Order Referring Case to Magistrate Judge - District Court of Connecticut ( 35.6 kB)


Preview Order Referring Case to Magistrate Judge - District Court of Connecticut
‘ 007 Pa e1 oft
‘·-—-——-—- Case 3:00-cv-01050-AVC Document 163 Filed 06/27/2 Q
Case 3:00—cv—01050—AVC Document 160 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 1 of4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
MARY CARR,ez‘ al, )
Plaintiffs, ) CIVIL ACTION NO
) 3:00 CV 1050 (AVC)
V >
) .Iune T9, 200'7
PATRICIA WILSON-COKER, in her )
official capacity as Commissioner ofthe State ) CLASS ACTION
of Connecticut Department of Social Services, )
Defendant. )

JOINT MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME AND REFERRAL TO JUDGE
MAGISTRATE
I. Introduction
On June 13, 2007, in response to a call from the chambers ofthe Court, plaintiffs
I submitted an up—date to the court regarding the settlement negotiations in the instant case On
June 14, 2007, the court issued an order setting a deadline oflluly i6"', 2007 for the parties to
submit their Ioint Pre-Trial Memorandum. The parties recognize and apologize for the fact that
settlement negotiations in this case have exceeded one year In addition to the need for a
settlement to be approved bythe Connecticut General Legislature, the Department of Social
Services has a new Commissioner, which led to a significant alteration in the settlement
3:00C\/1050(AVC) June , 2007. To the extent that the within motion seeks a
_ referral to a magistrate judge for settlement purposes, the motion is GRANTED.
The court refers this matter to Magistrate Judge Thomas P. Smith for the purpose
of convening a settlement conference. To the extent that the within motion seeks
to reopen discovery in this matter, the motion is DENIED, as the parties have
failed to set forth a sufficient basis for this request. To the extent that the
with'n motion seeks an extension of time in which to file a trial memorandum, the
moti n is GRANTED in part, and DENIED in part. On or before July 23, 2007, the
parties shall file a joint trial memorandum in accordance with the local stanking
order on trial memoranda in civil cases. See D. Conn. L. Civ. R. App. The c_ urt
will thereafter set down a date to commence the trial, should the parties fail
to reach a settlement.
SO ORDERED. i
- · . - rf ri *
Alfred Covello, U.S.D.J.