Date Set for Zane Seipler, Keith Nygren Settlement Conference

Zane Seipler campaigning for Sheriff on Primary Election Day in 2010.

Zane Seipler campaigning for Sheriff against Keith Nygren on Primary Election Day in 2010.

Here’s the latest Federal Court action in former McHenry County  Sheriff’s Deputy Zane Seipler’s wrongful termination case against Keith Nygren, et al:

  • 3-20-14: MOTION by Defendants County Of McHenry, Anton Cundiff, William Lutz, John Miller, Keith Nygren, Popovits, Sheriff of McHenry County, Kathleen Sieth Citation to Discover Assets (Engerman, Amy) Modified on 3/21/2014 (pg, ).[not a motion, taken off call] (Entered: 03/20/2014)
  • 3-20-14: NOTICE of Motion by Amy P. Engerman for presentment of motion for miscellaneous relief 472 before Honorable Iain D. Johnston on 4/10/2014 at 10:00 AM. (Engerman, Amy) Modified on 3/21/2014 (pg, ).[taken off of call] (Entered: 03/20/2014)
  • 3-21-14: ORDER with STATEMENT Status hearing set for 4/10/2014 at 10:00 AM before Magistrate Judge Johnston. Counsel for the parties shall appear in-person for the status on 4/10/2014. No later than 4/3/2014, the parties shall file a joint written status report containing the following 12 categories of information, with a courtesy copy sent to Magistrate Judge Johnstons chambers. (See attachment [below] for full detail.) Signed by the Honorable Iain D. Johnston on 3/21/2014: (yxp, ) (Entered: 03/21/2014)

The twelve points Magistrate Judge Johnston seeks follow:

The joint written status report shall include the following information:

  1. The names of all parties and counsel of record;
  2. The nature of the case, including the legal issues, factual issues, and affirmative defenses;
  3. All dates established in the case management order and all extensions given to date, including the date of the extension and which deadlines were extended. If a case management order has not been entered yet, the parties must state when such an order can be submitted to the Court;
  4. Whether the case is proceeding in a manner that will allow the case to meet the deadlines established by the case management order; and if, not, why not;
  5. The status of discovery, including the anticipated scope and length of discovery and all  discovery conducted to date;
  6. Any anticipated discovery disputes that may arise in the near future;
  7. Any anticipated discovery or dispositive motions;
  8. Whether any parallel cases exist (including, but not limited to, possible MDL litigation, underlying criminal proceedings, or related litigation);
  9. Whether the parties have discussed settlement. If the parties have discussed settlement, the parties must state the status of those discussions. If the parties have not discussed settlement, the parties must state why not;
  10. Whether the parties believe a settlement conference at this time has a reasonable likelihood of reaching a resolution. If the parties do not believe a settlement conference is reasonably likely to reach a resolution, the parties must state the specific reasons for that belief;
  11. Any significant rulings entered to date, although the parties need not address the sanctions order;
  12. Any additional information the parties believe is relevant to provide the Court with a better understanding of the case.

Counsel for all parties are to cooperate in preparing the status report. The Plaintiff’s counsel shall
provide a draft to the Defendants’ counsel in a reasonable amount of time to allow for sufficient
input.


Comments

Date Set for Zane Seipler, Keith Nygren Settlement Conference — 8 Comments

  1. Nothing here but “who,what,where,why, when” requests of the judge,obviously looking for a pre- case management case management.

    No shock here.

    MCSO isn’t going to roll over, any more so than Zane.

    Boring.

  2. I didn’t start laughing until I got to this Point.

    “10. Whether the parties believe a settlement conference at this time has a reasonable likelihood of reaching a resolution. If the parties do not believe a settlement conference is reasonably likely to reach a resolution, the parties must state the specific reasons for that belief; …”

    The Nygren gang will offer $1.00 and want to bargain down from there.

  3. ‘AZsupporter” The County should pay up.. The truth is Zane should have never been fired, he should have never had to fight this case in Federal court.

    Clearly, the case represents just one more of Nygren’s infamous temper tantrums….

    That is exactly one of the reasons we worked so hard to get rid of Stinky Zinke.

    Enough, is enough and it’s time to pay Zane and let the healing begin for the communities of McHenry County affected by politics….

    “AZ” you have some towels with initials on them for your older kids to attend to.

    Frankly, your time would be better served there.

  4. Settle on the facts being revealed.

    That’s the only settlement that should happen.

  5. Dum Dum, I have just as much time to read to your stupid posts as I do believing a court verified fraud like him.

    Notice he didn’t win either and has zero credibility with the normal thinking sane people.

  6. “AZsupporter” You just turn that finger right around you dumb dumb..

    You son;t even know how to spell..

  7. Will Sheriff Nygren have to leave his warm roost in FL to attend?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.