Gregory J. Kelly
United States Magistrate Judge
Gregory J. Kelly graduated with a B.S., magna cum laude, from State University College at Buffalo in 1984. He then attended the University of Toledo College of Law, where he earned his J.D. degree, magna cum laude, in 1988. He was a member of the University of Toledo Law Review and a member of The Order of the Coif. In November of 1988, Judge Kelly was admitted to the Florida Bar, and he proceeded to private practice, working in the Orlando office of Akerman Senterfitt until January 11, 2008. His practice areas included: commercial litigation; construction litigation and advice; corporate advisory services; franchise litigation; intellectual property litigation; land use and zoning litigation; securities litigation; class actions; and appellate practice. On January 14, 2008, Mr. Kelly was appointed as a United States Magistrate Judge for the U. S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Orlando Division.
The hyperlink below is a list of investments, of which the judge is aware, owned by family members or by him, which are subject to reporting on his annual Financial Disclosure Report, or which could constitute a financial interest that might necessitate recusal. This information is provided so that participants in this case will be able to advise the Court if there is any actual or apparent conflict of interest in the assignment of a case to this Judge. This information is not to be used for any other purpose. Attention is directed to the Ethics Reform Act of 1989, published in Title 5 of the United States Code Annotated, Appendix 4, Sections 101-112, for information concerning the procedure for obtaining copies of the Financial Disclosure Report.
Case & Trial Management Preferences:
Few motions qualify as true emergencies. Emergency motions should be designated as such in the caption of the motion. See M.D. Fla. L.R. 3.01(e). Emergency motions should be served on opposing counsel, and any necessary non-parties, by hand delivery or other equivalent method of service. If a motion is not a true emergency but is time sensitive, counsel may indicate the matter is time sensitive in the caption of the motion and in the body of a motion explain that the matter requires expedited consideration due to upcoming deadlines, etc.
Motions to Compel/Protective Order – Local Rule 3.04(a)
To effectuate the overall purpose of Local Rule 3.04(a), whenever a party moves to compel or for a protective order regarding requests for production of documents, requests for admissions, or interrogatories, the moving party shall email chambers an electronic document, in Microsoft Word format, containing a full quotation of each discovery request at issue and the response thereto. The document shall be emailed to: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Disputes Arising During Depositions
If a dispute arises during a deposition in a case in which Judge Kelly is the assigned Magistrate Judge, counsel and any unrepresented parties may contact chambers to ascertain whether the Judge is available to consider the disputed issue by telephone. However, counsel for the parties should conduct a good faith conference pursuant to Local Rule 3.01(g) on the record before involving the court. If the Judge is available, he will hear the dispute in a telephone conference call in which all counsel and any unrepresented parties participate.
Confidentiality orders should be limited to documents or specific categories of documents that are subject to confidential treatment under prevailing law. Judge Kelly will not issue blanket confidentiality orders that provided that any information designated by the parties as confidential will be protected. However, the parties are free to enter into private confidentiality agreements. Under Rule 26 (c) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, good cause must be shown before a protective order will be granted. In rare circumstances, the Court may order the filing of information under seal. See Middle District Discovery Handbook Section I. C. 2. If a request for filing under seal is made, the Eleventh Circuit precedent setting forth the governing standard and the public's interests as well as the requirements of Local Rule 1.09 should be addressed. See U.S. v. Rosenthal, 763 F.2d 1291, 1293 (11th Cir. 1985); Nixon v. Warner Communications, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 (1978); Chicago Tribune Co. v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., 263 F.3d 1304, 1311-12 (11th Cir. 2001); Globe Newspaper Co. v. Superior Court for Norfolk County, 457 U.S. 596, 606-07 (1982); Microlumen, Inc. v. Allegrati, Case No. 8:07-cv-350-T-17TBM, 2007 WL 1247068 (M.D. Fla. April 30, 2007).
Procedure for Assertion of Privilege
In order to establish an orderly and efficient procedure for designating information and documents withheld from discovery on the basis of a privilege or other recognized protection, United States Magistrate Judge Gregory J. Kelly has issued a Standing Order, No. 6:16-mc-28-Orl-GJK, which shall govern the procedure regarding the assertion of privilege in all cases assigned to Magistrate Judge Kelly. Any motion to compel or motion for protective order that fails to comply with the procedures set forth in the Standing Order will be denied. A link to the Standing Order is set forth below.
|6:16-mc-28 Procedure for Assertion of Privilege|
Assertions of Fact
Any assertion of fact in a motion must be supported by an affidavit, testimony or be uncontested by the opposition before it will be accepted by the Court.
Hearings and Oral Argument
Hearings on motions are scheduled at the written request of the parties or, from time to time, by order of the judge without the request of the parties. Witnesses and other evidence are not permitted at oral argument unless permission to present evidence is obtained from the Court before the hearing. Counsel and unrepresented parties who wish to present argument are generally required to appear in court in person. Oral arguments and evidentiary hearings will be scheduled by the courtroom deputy. Telephonic appearances may be granted regarding non-evidentiary hearings upon the request of counsel.
When appropriate, the Court would appreciate receiving a notebook of the relevant authorities (preferably with the pertinent portions highlighted).
Judge Kelly’s courtroom has audio-visual capabilities that may be used provided counsel makes advance arrangement. Counsel and unrepresented parties who wish to reserve the Court’s equipment should contact Judge Kelly’s courtroom deputy clerk well before the date of the hearing or trial. If counsel and unrepresented parties wish to bring their own equipment into the courtroom for the hearing or trial, they must apply for permission to do so and obtain an order granting that request well before the hearing or trial begins.
Official Record of Proceedings
All proceedings before Judge Kelly are recorded by the courtroom tape recording system or by a court reporter. The parties are not permitted to use a court reporter or other recording system to make a record of the proceedings conducted by Judge Kelly except with his prior consent. Transcripts of tape-recorded proceedings can be obtained by making a written request to Judge Kelly’s courtroom deputy clerk.
Whenever a party submits a proposed order to the Court, we would appreciate receiving a courtesy copy sent to our chambers e-mail address, preferably in Microsoft Word format.
Upon consent of the parties, Judge Kelly will schedule bench and jury trials to begin on a date certain. The parties should provide the Court with two copies of witness and exhibit lists the morning of trial. All exhibits should be marked before trial. In addition, parties should provide Judge Kelly with a bench book containing copies of documentary exhibits they intend to use at trial, which copies should be marked with exhibit numbers. Judge Kelly appreciates receiving a diskette containing the parties’ proposed jury instructions or proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law at the final pretrial conference.
Generally the Court will conduct voir dire taking the proposed questions from the parties into account. However, in appropriate circumstances the Court will allow counsel to conduct voir dire. If counsel maintains there is good cause for allowing the attorneys to conduct voir dire in a particular case, they should file a motion requesting permission to do so and state the specific basis for their request. If the parties agree that they would prefer to conduct voir dire, they should file a motion requesting permission to do so and the Court will allow limited voir dire by the parties.