In a recent court session, discussions centered around the need for additional discovery in an ongoing case, with one attorney advocating for a short continuance to facilitate this process. The attorney expressed concerns that the opposing side was unwilling to cooperate with discovery requests, which included interrogatories and depositions, citing a belief that they could take advantage of the situation due to the attorney's recent appointment.

The attorney emphasized the importance of conducting reasonable discovery to ensure a fair trial, arguing that the lack of pre-trial depositions could significantly extend the trial duration. If depositions were not conducted beforehand, the attorney estimated that the trial could take up to two weeks, compared to less than a week if discovery was allowed.

The presiding judge acknowledged the request for a continuance and indicated that an order would be signed and uploaded later that day, determining whether the case would proceed under a level two or level three scheduling order. The judge also addressed procedural matters regarding upcoming motions, clarifying that certain hearings would need to be conducted in person rather than remotely, as per court policy.

The session highlighted the ongoing challenges in managing discovery timelines and the court's efforts to streamline processes while ensuring all parties have the opportunity to present their cases effectively. The judge's commitment to issuing a timely order reflects the court's intention to maintain efficiency in the judicial process.