Free Status Report - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut


File Size: 42.4 kB
Pages: 2
Date: July 27, 2004
File Format: PDF
State: Connecticut
Category: District Court of Connecticut
Author: unknown
Word Count: 323 Words, 2,095 Characters
Page Size: 612.72 x 1008 pts
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ctd/9501/62.pdf

Download Status Report - District Court of Connecticut ( 42.4 kB)


Preview Status Report - District Court of Connecticut
l Case 3:OO—cv-OO854;CFD Document 62 Filed 07/26[2004 Page 1 of 2
I Ill
: \_j‘,i.ZEI *‘”
i uu lu zu A ll ‘
I UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT W ;i‘;Q€;§."Z` I
l DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT ` jj; ~· i-* ·
I LAWRENCE KALADISH, :
Plaintiff CIVIL ACTION NO.
: 3:00CV854 (CFD)
VS. :
CROMPTON CORPORATION,
CROMPTON & KNOWLES :
CORPORATION, UNIROYAL CHEMICAL :
CORPORATION, UNIROYAL :
CHEMICAL COMPANY, INC., :
UNIROYAL, INC. AND UNIROYAL : I
HOLDING, INC. : JULY 22, 2004
Defendants :
JOINT STATUS REPORT I
A. Nature ofthe Case:
l. The Plaintiff brought this claim against the Defendants requesting I
monetary damages and equitable relief as a result of environmental
contamination pursuant to CERCLA, RCRA and related state law claims.
2. The following Motions are pending: (1) The Defendants,
Uniroyal, Inc.’s and Uniroyal Holding, In0.’s, Motion for Summary Judgment,
dated October 29, 2002; (2) The Defendants’ Motion to Strike Plaintiff s Denials
and Limitations, dated December 23, 2002; and (3) Defendants’ Motion to Strike
E

I ,_ _ Case 3:OO—cv-OO8i4=DFD Document 62 Filed 07/26/5004 Page 2 of 2
|
i
I
i
the Declaration and Expert Report of Michael Bartos, dated December 23, 2002. I
i 3. This matter will be tried to the Court.
B. Discovegy:
1. Discovery is complete.
C. Settlement:
1. A settlement conference was conducted on November 5, 2001.
The conference was conducted by the Honorable William I. Gartinkel, United y
States Magistrate Judge.
2. There are no outstanding reports due. i
3. The parties do / do not believe a settlement conference would be l
beneficial at this time.
D. Trial Preparation:
l. The case can be ready within a reasonable time after the Court’s
decision on the pending Motions.
2. No other preparation is contemplated bythe parties.
3. Unless the Court’s decision on the pending Motions requires
additional pleadings, there are no additional pleadings contemplated at this time.
4. A Joint Trial Memorandum has not been filed and there is no