Case 3:16-cv-00421-RV-EMT Document 21 Filed 03/15/17 Page 1 of 7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
PENSACOLA DIVISION

MATTHEW SCHMITT,

Plaintiff, CASE NO.: 3:16-cv-421-RV/EMT
v.

CITY OF PENSACOLA, et al.,

Defendants.
_______________________________________/

REPORT OF PARTIES’ PLANNING MEETING (FORM 52) AND
ADDITIONAL MATTERS REQUIRED BY INITIAL SCHEDULING ORDER

In accordance with the Court’s Initial Scheduling Order [Doc. 14], the parties provide the

following information:

REPORT OF THE PARTIES’ PLANNING MEETING (FORM 52)

1. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f), the parties conferred through their counsel, identified as
follows:

Rocco Calamusa, Jr., Esquire – Counsel for Plaintiff, Matthew Schmitt

J. Wes Gay, Esquire – Counsel for Defendants, City of Pensacola and Ashton
Hayward

2. Initial Disclosures. The parties will complete the initial disclosures required by

Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1) by March 29, 2017.

3. Discovery Plan. The parties propose this discovery plan:

a. Discovery will be needed on these subjects: Discovery will be needed on all

factual matters related to Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants as alleged in the

Complaint, whether related to liability or damages, as well as any defenses

asserted by Defendants.
Case 3:16-cv-00421-RV-EMT Document 21 Filed 03/15/17 Page 2 of 7

b. Discovery deadline: All discovery will be commenced in time to be completed by

November 10, 2017.

c. Interrogatories: Maximum number of interrogatories and the response due dates

are to be governed by the applicable Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local

Rules of this Court.

d. Requests for Admissions: Maximum number of requests for admissions and the

response due dates are to be governed by the applicable Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure and Local Rules of this Court.

e. Number of Depositions: A maximum of eight (8) depositions will be taken by

Plaintiff and a maximum of eight (8) depositions will be taken by Defendants.

f. Length of Depositions: Defendants request that each deposition other than that of

Plaintiff shall be limited to a maximum of 4 hours, unless extended by agreement

of parties. Plaintiff requests that all depositions be limited to a maximum of 7

hours, including Plaintiff.

g. Expert Reports: Reports from retained experts under Rule 26 (a)(2) are due:

from Plaintiff by May 17, 2017.

from Defendants by June 14, 2017.

h. Supplementation of Discovery: Supplementations under Rule 26(e) are due within

a timely manner if the party learns in some material respect the disclosure or

response is incorrect or incomplete, but shall necessarily occur within thirty (30)

days upon discovery of the need to supplement or thirty (30) days prior to the

close of discovery.

2
Case 3:16-cv-00421-RV-EMT Document 21 Filed 03/15/17 Page 3 of 7

4. Other Items.

a. Scheduling Conference: The parties do not request a conference with the court

before the entry of the Scheduling Order.

b. Pretrial Conference: Defendants do not request a Pretrial Conference. Plaintiff

does request a Pretrial Conference.

c. Amending Pleadings/Joining Parties (Plaintiff): The last date for Plaintiff to

amend the pleadings or join parties is April 12, 2017.

d. Amending Pleadings/Joining Parties (Defendant): The last date for Defendants to

amend the pleadings or join parties is May 17, 2017.

e. Dispositive Motions: All potentially dispositive motions should be filed by

December 1, 2017. Plaintiff has twenty-one (21) days to respond to Defendants’

dispositive motions.

f. Prospects for Settlement: Settlement at this time is unlikely.

g. Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedures: Settlement may be enhanced by use

of the following alternative dispute resolution procedures. Mediation will be

scheduled and completed no later than November 3, 2017.

h. Witness and Exhibit Lists: Final lists of witnesses and exhibits under Rule 26

(a)(3) should be due thirty (30) days before trial.

3
Case 3:16-cv-00421-RV-EMT Document 21 Filed 03/15/17 Page 4 of 7

i. Objections to Witness and Exhibit Lists: Parties should have seven (7) days after

service of the final list of witnesses and exhibits to list objections under Rule

26(a)(3).

j. Trial Date and Length: The parties in good faith estimate that this case should be

ready for trial on or after January 22, 2018, and anticipate it will take

approximately 3 days to try this case.1

k. Other matters: None.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED BY THE
COURT’S SCHEDULING ORDER

5. Magistrate: The parties have conferred regarding their willingness to consent to

magistrate judge jurisdiction.

6. Nature and Basis of Claims and Defenses

a. Plaintiff’s Position: Plaintiff, Matthew Schmitt, is pursuing a retaliation claim

against Defendant City of Pensacola and Defendant Ashton Hayward, in his

individual capacity. Such claims are brought under Title VII and 42 U.S.C.

Section 1981 via Section 1983. Plaintiff engaged in protected activity and as a

result, suffered adverse actions. Plaintiff asserts that a casual connection exists

between his protected activity and the adverse actions. Defendants retaliated

against Plaintiff by failing to rectify the harassment and discrimination

complained of, by subjecting him to an unwarranted and public investigation, by

publicly demeaning his good name and record, and by ultimately terminating his

1 This extension of the Court’s preferred trial deadline is requested in light of the existing
obligations of counsel for the parties.

4
Case 3:16-cv-00421-RV-EMT Document 21 Filed 03/15/17 Page 5 of 7

employment. Defendants failed to articulate a legitimate non-retaliatory reason

for their conduct. In addition, Defendant Hayward is not entitled to qualified

immunity. Plaintiff asserts that the retaliation was malicious, willful, and with

reckless disregard for his rights. Plaintiff further asserts that he suffered

emotional distress, embarrassment, and humiliation because of Defendants’

conduct. Plaintiff seeks declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as, reinstatement

or front-pay, back-pay, lost seniority, benefits, and pension, nominal damages,

compensatory damages, punitive damages, attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses.

b. Defendants’ Position:

Defendants deny all of Plaintiff’s claims in their entirety. Plaintiff cannot

establish a prima facie case of race discrimination or retaliation for any alleged

protected activity. Defendants have raised a number of defenses in the Answer

and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiff’s Complaint, which are incorporated by

reference here. No adverse employment actions were motivated by any

discriminatory or retaliatory animus. Defendants can show legitimate, non-

discriminatory and non-retaliatory reasons for taking any and all adverse actions

against Plaintiff, which he cannot undermine with any direct or circumstantial

evidence.

7. Possibility of Settlement: The issue of settlement is set forth in paragraphs 4(f) and (g)

above.

8. Proposed Timetables and Cutoff Dates: The proposed timetables and cutoff dates are

set forth in paragraphs 1-4 above, including proposed revisions to the scheduling order.

5
Case 3:16-cv-00421-RV-EMT Document 21 Filed 03/15/17 Page 6 of 7

9. Discovery Requirements: The parties’ respective discovery requirements and proposed

deadlines are set forth in paragraphs 1-4 above.

10. Electronic Discovery: Disclosure or discovery of electronically stored information

should be handled as follows:

a. If a party requests or produces information from electronic or computer-based

media, the disclosure or production shall be limited to data reasonably available to

the parties in the ordinary course of business. If a party knows or has reason to

believe additional data or information exists but is not being produced, it shall

identify the nature and extent of that additional information or data, the identity of

person(s) with knowledge of its nature and extent, and the expected cost(s) of

retrieval, so that the requesting party can reasonably determine whether to pursue

its production.

b. In the event the court orders the production of data beyond what is reasonably

available to the parties in the ordinary course of business, the requesting party

shall bear the cost of its disclosure or production.

c. The production of any such electronic or computer-based media shall be

accomplished by providing hard copy or, at the requester's written request, by

providing such data on a computer disk. The parties shall agree on the format

(e.g. whether on CD or DVD).

d. The parties have taken and will continue to take reasonable measures to preserve

potentially discoverable data from alteration or destruction in the ordinary course

of business or otherwise.

6
Case 3:16-cv-00421-RV-EMT Document 21 Filed 03/15/17 Page 7 of 7

e. Upon reasonable belief by the requesting party that privileged information was

inadvertently produced, the requesting party agrees to immediately contact the

producing party to arrange prompt return of the information.

11. Other Matters: Pursuant to Rule 5(b)(2)(E) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the

parties consent to service via electronic means.

12. Undersigned counsel is authorized to file this motion on behalf of the Parties.

Respectfully submitted on May 15, 2017.

/s/ J. Wes Gay
Robert E. Larkin, III
Fla. Bar No. 160814
J. Wes Gay
Fla. Bar No. 104743
ALLEN NORTON & BLUE, P.A.
906 North Monroe Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32303
Tel: (850) 561-3503
Fax: (850) 561-0332

Attorneys for Defendants

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on March 15, 2017, undersigned electronically filed the
foregoing with the Clerk of the Court by using the CM/ECF system, which will send a notice of
electronic filing: Joshua R. Gale, Esq., Wiggins, Childs, Pantazis, Fisher, Goldfarb, LCC, 101.
N. Woodland Blvd., Suite 600, Deland, Florida 32720, D.G. Pantazis, Jr., Esq., and Rocco
Calamusa, Esq., Wiggins, Childs, Pantazis, Fisher, Goldfarb, LCC, The Kress Building, 301
Nineteenth St. North, Birmingham, Alabama 35202.

/s/ J. Wes Gay
Attorney

7