United States District Court Eastern District of Louisiana, 2026

Crystal of Kenner, LLC v. SafePoint Insurance Company

Crystal of Kenner, LLC v. SafePoint Insurance Company
United States District Court Eastern District of Louisiana · Decided January 27, 2026
Crystal of Kenner, LLC v. SafePoint Insurance Company

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA CRYSTAL OF KENNER, LLC CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO. 23-6520 SAFEPOINT INSURANCE SECTION “R” (5) COMPANY ORDER AND REASONS Before the Court is plaintiff’s unopposed motion to modify the scheduling order to extend plaintiff’s expert discovery deadline and to continue trial.1 Rule 16(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that “[a] scheduling order may be modified only for good cause and with the judge’s consent.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). The “good cause standard requires the party seeking relief to show that the deadlines cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party needing the extension.” S&W Enters., L.L.C. v. SouthTrust Bank, NA, 315 F.3d 533, 535 (5th Cir. 2003) (cleaned up). Whether to grant or deny a continuance is within the sound discretion of the trial court. United States v. Alix, 86 F.3d 429, 434 (5th Cir. 1996).

1 R. Doc. 22.

The Court finds that plaintiff has not met the good cause standard here.

See S&W Enters., L.L.C., 315 F.3d at 535. As to the expert discovery deadline, that the retained experts have requested an extension, without more, does not show that the deadlines could not be reasonably met with diligence. As to the continuance of trial, the Court issued the scheduling order? in October, two months before Madison Pitre was substituted as the attorney of record.3 With diligence, Mr. Pitre could have discerned this conflict before moving to be substituted, particularly as Pitre’s law firm, Hair Shunnarah Trial Attorneys, was and remains plaintiff's counsel. Plaintiff has provided no reason why one of the other hundreds of litigators employed at Hair Shunnarah could not reasonably represent plaintiff at trial, including his co- counsel on the case. The Court finds that plaintiff has not shown good cause to continue the May 18, 2026 trial date.

For the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES the motion to modify the scheduling order.

New Orleans, Louisiana, this27th day of January, 2026.

Lorn Varvee_ SARAH S. VANCE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2 R. Doc. 16.

3 R. Doc. 19.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.