At a second case conference in advance of a summary judgment motion, the court addressed stalled motion preparation arising from document production, cross-examination, and scheduling disputes.
The court held that the matter had benefited from a light-touch form of case management in Civil Practice Court sufficient to break the procedural logjam.
With the procedural issues resolved and settlement discussions canvassed, the summary judgment motion was directed to proceed.
The endorsement explains that full Rule 77 case management was unnecessary because nothing remained for the Civil Practice Court judge to do.
