In a January 30, 2007 hearing on Plaintiff's Motion to Lift Stay and for Case Management Order, and Plaintiff's Motion to Clarify, the court set a pretrial schedule as follows: Defendant's dispositive motions are due, April 30, 2007 , Plaintiff's response is due May 31, 2007, and Defendant's reply is due June 14, 2007. The clerk's status to set the dates for the oral argument on summary judgment will be June 15. The judge encouraged the parties to proceed to trial without unnecessary motion practice. The trial has been set for the entire week of September 24, 2007. Plaintiff has been preparing for trial, and is eager to proceed in order to seek justice.
The court struck the February 7, 2007 oral argument date for the motion to reopen proofs and the fee petition. Having previously granted the motion to reopen proofs, the court gave Defendants until February 27, 2007 to respond to the fee petition. Plaintiff has until March 14 to reply, with a clerk's status on March 15 to set an argument date for the fee petition. With respect to the fee petition, the court relayed that it has determined plaintiff's entitlement to attorneys' fees and costs due to the belated production of the 1200 documents. The magnitude of the award is at issue.
Early on in the case plaintiff desired a jury trial. No paperwork has been filed indicating such a desire. Plaintiff, will soon be filing a motion for leave to file a jury demand. However, the case law limits the judge's discretion for filing of a jury demand after the case has commenced.
The court continues to reserve ruling on defendants' petition for duplicate costs arising
from the plaintiff's 2nd amended complaint.
In his suit against the University, nine claims are now at issue.
Counts I and II allege, respectively, breach of express and of
implied contract, due to violations of University regulations, and
his rights to freedom of inquiry, as set forth in the University
manual and handbook. Freedom of inquiry, one of the most highly
protected freedoms in an academic community, is the freedom to
inquire without penalty or retribution. Counts IV and V allege
breach of express and implied contracts for financial aid
(especially free tutoring). Newly added counts VII and VIII reallege
these breaches of contract with refinements based on discovery to
date. Count IX for spoliation of evidence was added for breach of
duty to preserve evidence by destroying thousands of potentially
relevant documents. Count VI alleges detrimental reliance on the
promises of the University. Count X is for tortious interference
with contract. Vernón claims the University lured him from
another program, and uprooted his life. Vernón is represented
by Elaine Siegel (ELAINE K.B. SIEGEL & ASSOC., P..C., 39 South
LaSalle Street, Suite 617, Chicago, Illinois 60603, (312) 236-8088,
Vernón, a kukkiwon certified black belt, is one of Chicago's
most prominent non-projectile weapons practitioners and most popular
beach personalities. He often performs using the nickname "Tony the
Tiger". You may have seen him perform July 3rd in the Wilmette
Parks District Independence Day Celebration. He was the 1st
middleweight collegiate athlete to deadlift 600 lbs. without using
steroids. His father, Dr. Carlos Vernón (1937-2003), was the
1957 Athlete of the Year for the Republic of Panama and is the
greatest sprinter in Latin American history. He ran a 10.2 when the
world record was 10.1.
Donations to his legal fund by check and money order, at
Vernón Legal Fund, 1507 E. 53rd. St. - #608, Chicago, IL
60615 are welcomed. Donations by credit card and electronic payment
can be made via free paypal accounts (from www.paypal.com) to
email@example.com or firstname.lastname@example.org.