Parrish

Parrish v. Wal-Mart Associates, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 28, 20241:23-cv-00284California693 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

11 CARNELL PARRISH, Case No. 1:23-cv-00284-JLT-CDB

12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING AS MODIFIED

STIPULATED REQUEST TO CONTINUE

13 v. EXPERT DISCOVERY DEADLINES AND

RELATED DATES

14 WAL-MART ASSOCIATES, INC. (Doc. 20) 15 Defendant.

16 17 18 Background 19 Plaintiff Carnell Parrish (“Plaintiff”) initiated this action against Defendant Wal-Mart 20 Associates, Inc. (“Defendant”) with the filing of a complaint in state court on or about January 21 13, 2023. (Doc. 1 at 2). On February 24, 2023, Defendant removed the action to this Court. Id. 22 On May 24, 2023, the Court entered the operative scheduling order which, among other things, 23 admonished the parties that the case management dates set therein are considered to be firm and 24 will not be modified absent a showing of good cause, even if the request to modify is made by 25 stipulation. (Doc. 13 at 7). 26 On September 27, 2023, the parties filed a joint mid-discovery status report in which they 27 summarized their ongoing discovery…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.