New Scheduling Order in Ex Post Facto Plus Case
As expected, Trial in the Ex Post Facto Plus case has been pushed back to February from November. The new Trial Date is set for the two-week trial calendar beginning on February 1, 2021.
Accordingly, some of the scheduling deadlines have also been pushed back. The following are the dates:
July 31, 2020 The Parties shall exchange rebuttal expert witness summaries and reports.
October 15, 2020 The Parties shall complete all discovery, including expert discovery.
November 5, 2020 The Parties shall file all dispositive pre-trial motions and memoranda of law. The Parties shall also file any motions to strike or exclude expert testimony, whether based on Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), or any another basis.
December 14, 2020 The Parties shall each file one motion in limine in accordance with Section III below. All motions in limine must be filed at least six weeks before calendar call.
January 4, 2021 The Parties shall file a joint pre-trial stipulation, exhibit lists, and witness lists in accordance with Local Rule 16.1(d) and (e) and Section IV below. The Parties shall also file proposed jury instructions or conclusions of law (for non-jury trials) in accordance with Section V below.
January 4, 2021 The Parties shall file their deposition designations in accordance with Section VI below.
See the order: Does v Swearingen – New Scheduling Order
Just like the flu, COVID-19 is not going away. FDLE will drag this case on for years. They will continue to submit motions to dismiss at every stage of the timeline. They are waiting out the plaintiffs to die.
So it was an FDLE motion that prompted the continuance?
Yes, it was. They switched attorneys. It’s only a couple months, but it’s still on them.
Here the comment I left on the article:
Well what do you know! A high school TEACHER, not a STRANGER DANGER issue, eh? Big surprise to everyone, huh? And 40 yrs later I guess we’re at “just believe her”. Is the man even still alive?
The law actually takes effect on or after July 1, 2020. It does not violate the U.S. and Florida State Ex Post Facto Laws, as the registry does.
Since it has been revealed that this ex post facto case will not effect a decision pertaining to all of the members of Florida Action Committee. I feel that transparency is of the utmost! With that said I would like to know who picked the “does” and more importantly are any of the “does” family members, (i.e. sons, daughters, spouses or such), of Florida Action Committee Staff? Or are the “does” Staff members of Florida Action Committee? It goes without saying that since all the members donated and stand to gain a very meager, to no benefit from this case we are intitled to know!
What are you talking about? I only posted your comment to make a point of how off base you are.
The challenge is FACIAL AND AS APPLIED!!! If you bothered to read it, you would have known that.
Shlepp Rock – you are completely misguided and I’m only publishing your ignorant comment in case others are as confused as you. And NONE of the Does are family members of FAC staff. NONE!!!
Also, there are no FAC staff.
Policy is not staff. I recently posted off topic and my post is not listed now, nor can I respond to Policy. I am stifled by the local, state and federal governments, and now apparently by FAC. I will make no future posts or comments. Good luck to you all. Unsubscribed.
I don’t think they should bend the rules just for you. I commented about your off topic comments not FAC. Maybe just respect the rules and life will be a little easier on you. Don’t blame others for what you do.
In challenges such as these, you need to use the most sympathetic does available. Does your legal experience suggest otherwise? What do you see in the complaint to suggest that the does are inappropriate here?
I heard that there is someone who is matching donations to this cause? Is that still the case?
Yes, it is.
I found the matching info buried informally in the middle of an e-mail. Perhaps there are others who are unaware? Consider inserting some matching language under the thermometer on the webpage. Get that word out! We love our expert witnesses!
Then why post it here? Not saying it’s not important but I and many others donated a lot of money to this cause and come here for news on this case. It even says in the comment policy “Stay on topic”… maybe that policy was put in place so the subject matter would not get watered down such as what happened here. The last three comments has nothing to do with the Ex Post Facto case. Your topic deserves its own reporting and comment section because it is important but just not here as it doesn’t apply. I’ve been a member from the beginning and this seems to happen quite a bit.
This case is very important to right the wrongs done to people who took plea deals or other situations over 20 yrs ago.
Most of whom would have fought if they knew that after the fact their burden would illegally get harder on them.
Each small win is towards a bigger over all win. Please support this case as best you can
At what point in this sequence of events does the court rule on FDLE’s motion to dismiss?
(Or, can they do so anytime, or not do so at all and default to allowing to proceed?)
They can do so anytime. That’s still out there, but the fact that the judge didn’t grant the State’s request for a Stay means that the case is proceeding.