Case Activity (368)

1. Minutes | Filed: August 17, 2026 | Entered: August 20, 2026 Aberdin et al v. The Geo Group, Inc.

   P.I.: Other | Texas Southern

   Status Conference Motion Hearing

   Minute entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Diana Song Quiroga. Status Conference and Motion Hearing held on August 17, 2026. Plaintiff appeared via Zoom through counsel Jared Clark and Defendant appeared via Zoom through counsel Shawn Fitzpatrick. This case involves a negligence claim against a private contractor for injuries sustained while Plaintiffs were in detention, stemming from an assault carried out by other detainees. The Court acknowledged delays in resolving issues and motions, also acknowledging the need for an amended scheduling order in light of the extension of deadlines.As to the pending opposed motion for live, remote testimony (Dkt. No. 22), the Court inquired as to whether this was for trial and whether any depositions of the Plaintiffs had already occurred. Mr. Clark stated that no depositions had yet been taken. The parties argued about deposing the Plaintiffs, and, after hearing the parties more on the issue, the Court crystallized the issue as one of who should bear the cost of depositions. The Court stated that it would likely leave this decision for the District Judgeparticularly as these are not ordinary witnessesand would take the issue under advisement pending discovery.Mr. Clark next noted that there were additional discovery and depositions Plaintiffs wished to conduct. Mr. Fitzpatrick objected to any depositions not stated in the Plaintiffs motion for an extension of the discovery deadline. As for the Plaintiffs motion for leave to file an amended complaint (Dkt. No. 28), the Court separated the amendments into two buckets: the easier one (spelling, gross negligence, exemplary damages) and the harder one (the unpled claims). The Court asked whether these additional claims were derivative of previously pled claims, and Mr. Clark affirmed that these were not new claims, but were additional theories of negligence. The Court asked counsel to look at the proposed amended complaint (Dkt. No. 28-1) and look at the motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 27) and see what they can clean up after determining what is still in dispute, informing the Court within two weeks of the current status of the amended complaint and MSJ. The Court also asked for an advisory within two weeks informing the Court of a timeline for depositions to be completed. The Court had previously granted Defendants request for in camera review of photo evidence. Dkt. No. 21. The Court, in balancing the need for Plaintiffs ability to identify their assailants and the potential abuse of the evidence, proposed redacting all names and USMS numbers from the document, leaving just the photos. Both parties were amenable. An Order will issue on this matter.Appearances: Jared Clark f/PLAINTIFF; GEO Group f/DEFENDANT. (10:01 a.m. 11:08 a.m.) (ERO: Tania Trevio)

2. Motion | Filed: August 20, 2026 | Entered: August 20, 2026 Elizondo et al v. Carnival Corporation d/b/a Carnival Cruise Line et al

   P.I.: Other | Texas Southern

   Extension of Time

   Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time To Respond To Complaint by Carnival Corporation, filed. Motion Docket Date 9/10/2026. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Granting Defendant's Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Complaint) (Woghiren, Ewaen)

3. 366 additional result(s)