Case Activity (802)

1. Misc | Filed: June 24, 2026 | Entered: June 24, 2026 MURRAY et al v. COUNTY OF HUDSON et al

   Civil Rights: Other | New Jersey

   Letter

   Letter from Merick H. Limsky. (LIMSKY, MERICK)

2. Order | Filed: June 24, 2026 | Entered: June 24, 2026 MURRAY et al v. COUNTY OF HUDSON et al

   Civil Rights: Other | New Jersey

   Text Order

   TEXT ORDER - The Court has reviewed Plaintiffs Patricia Aiken and Omar Ortiz's letter dated June 18, 2026 concerning the proposed briefing schedule filed (ECF No. 206 ) in connection with Plaintiff Daniel Murray's anticipated motion to reopen. (ECF No. 208.) In the letter, Plaintiffs represent that they were neither consulted about nor involved in selecting the dates proposed to the Court and request that the proposed briefing schedule be amended accordingly. (Id.) Plaintiffs Aiken and Ortiz's request is GRANTED. The Court's June 7, 2026 Text Order expressly directed the parties to "meet, confer, and file a proposed briefing schedule" regarding Plaintiff Murray's anticipated motion (ECF No. 204). Plaintiffs' submission makes clear that the parties did not comply with the Court's directive before submitting the proposed schedule. Compliance with court orders is not optional. See, e.g., In re Asbestos Prods. Liab. Litig. (No. VI), 718 F.3d 236, 243 (3d Cir. 2013) ("[D]istrict courts have the inherent authority to manage their dockets and courtrooms."); Eash v. Riggins Trucking Inc., 757 F.2d 557, 564-65 (3d Cir. 1985) (en banc) (recognizing a district court's inherent authority to manage litigation before it). The Court further notes that disagreements concerning routine scheduling matters rarely warrant the expenditure of scarce judicial resources and ordinarily should be resolved through good-faith consultation among the parties. Accordingly, the Scheduling Order entered at ECF No. 207 is VACATED. On or before July 1, 2026, all parties wishing to participate in the anticipated motion practice shall meet and confer and jointly submit an amended proposed briefing schedule that provides all plaintiffs with a reasonable opportunity to review, join, oppose, or otherwise respond to any motion filed by Plaintiff Murray before Defendants' opposition deadline is triggered. The parties shall submit a single proposed schedule consented to by all participating parties. If, despite good-faith efforts, the parties are unable to reach an agreement, they shall submit a joint letter of no more than three pages setting forth their respective positions, and the Court will establish an appropriate briefing schedule.. So Ordered by Judge Julien Xavier Neals on 6/24/2026. (kd, )

3. 800 additional result(s)