UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                             
                    DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA                                


John Collingham, et al.,             Case No. 21-CV-2466 (JMB/DLM)       
                    Plaintiffs,                                          
v.                                             ORDER                     
Northfield Hospital and Clinics,                                         
                    Defendant.                                           

    Currently before the Court are the Parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment.  
(Doc. Nos. 114, 132.)  The Parties’ briefs dispute, among other matters, issues nearly 
identical to those raised in Kiel v. Mayo Clinic Health Sys. Se. Minnesota, No. CV-22-1319 
(JRT/ECW), 

 (D. Minn. Aug. 4, 2023) and which are currently being 
considered on appeal by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.  Because 
the Eighth Circuit’s decision in Kiel will impact the Court’s analysis of the issues presented 
in this case, it is appropriate to stay the present matter.               
    This Court has inherent power to stay proceedings as part of its authority “to control 
the disposition of the causes on its docket with economy of time and effort [in mind] for 
itself, for counsel, and for litigants.”  Landis v. N. Am. Co., 

 (1936)); see 
also Sierra Club v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 

 (8th Cir. 2006) (“A 

district court has broad discretion to stay proceedings when appropriate to control its 
docket.”).  “How this can best be done calls for the exercise of judgment, which must weigh 
competing interests and maintain an even balance.”  Landis, 299 U.S. at 254–255. 
    The Court concludes that a stay is appropriate to avoid exhausting judicial resources 
to decide disputes—including the arguments raised in the Parties’ pending motions for 

summary judgment—which are likely to be impacted by the Eighth Circuit’s decision in 
Kiel.                                                                     
    Based on the foregoing, and on all of the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT 
IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:                                                   
    1.   This case is stayed pending the Eighth Circuit’s decision in Kiel. 
    2.   The Parties shall contact the Court within five days of the Eighth Circuit’s 

         decision to request a status conference with the Court.         

Dated:  April 25, 2024                  /s/ Jeffrey M. Bryan              
                                       Judge Jeffrey M. Bryan            
                                       United States District Court      

                UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                             
                    DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA                                


John Collingham, et al.,             Case No. 21-CV-2466 (JMB/DLM)       
                    Plaintiffs,                                          
v.                                             ORDER                     
Northfield Hospital and Clinics,                                         
                    Defendant.                                           

    Currently before the Court are the Parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment.  
(Doc. Nos. 114, 132.)  The Parties’ briefs dispute, among other matters, issues nearly 
identical to those raised in Kiel v. Mayo Clinic Health Sys. Se. Minnesota, No. CV-22-1319 
(JRT/ECW), 

 (D. Minn. Aug. 4, 2023) and which are currently being 
considered on appeal by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.  Because 
the Eighth Circuit’s decision in Kiel will impact the Court’s analysis of the issues presented 
in this case, it is appropriate to stay the present matter.               
    This Court has inherent power to stay proceedings as part of its authority “to control 
the disposition of the causes on its docket with economy of time and effort [in mind] for 
itself, for counsel, and for litigants.”  Landis v. N. Am. Co., 

 (1936)); see 
also Sierra Club v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 

 (8th Cir. 2006) (“A 

district court has broad discretion to stay proceedings when appropriate to control its 
docket.”).  “How this can best be done calls for the exercise of judgment, which must weigh 
competing interests and maintain an even balance.”  Landis, 299 U.S. at 254–255. 
    The Court concludes that a stay is appropriate to avoid exhausting judicial resources 
to decide disputes—including the arguments raised in the Parties’ pending motions for 

summary judgment—which are likely to be impacted by the Eighth Circuit’s decision in 
Kiel.                                                                     
    Based on the foregoing, and on all of the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT 
IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:                                                   
    1.   This case is stayed pending the Eighth Circuit’s decision in Kiel. 
    2.   The Parties shall contact the Court within five days of the Eighth Circuit’s 

         decision to request a status conference with the Court.         

Dated:  April 25, 2024                  /s/ Jeffrey M. Bryan              
                                       Judge Jeffrey M. Bryan            
                                       United States District Court