Apparently you can't just waive the Local Rules by agreement, you sort of need the Court to sign on to your little side deal too:
The Local Rules are not simply guidelines for the litigants. They also exist, in some instances, for the Court's benefit as well. The rule at issue (Local Rule 26.1(h)(1)) was created to prevent exactly what is happening in this case . . . a flurry of last minute motions to prepare the case for trial. Here we are, after the discovery deadline has passed, on the issue of plaintiff retaining an expert on a matter that could have - and should have - been resolved long before now. Perhaps defendant would like to retain its own expert? Perhaps the next step would be an evidentiary hearing? This is why the rule exists.Five very good questions -- is it Passover (plus one) yet?
No 1aw has been cited that gives the parties the right to summarily decide they won't be bound by a Local Rule. Were that the case, perhaps the parties could also agree to disregard the prefiling conference requirement (Local Rule 7.1(a)(3))? Perhaps the parties could agree not to be bound by the page limitations as well? A party could file a 45 page motion and as long as the opposition doesn't raise the page limits issue the Court should or must accept same?
Also, if I'm not mistaken, the Local Rule at issue (you have to file discovery motions thirty days after grounds exist) -- wasn't that Magistrate Judge Brown's idea in the first place?
Oops!
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét