Robinson Improvement Company v. St. Johns County, Florida, Uniform Case Management Report (March 10, 2026)

From U.S. District Court website, pacer.gov: 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

JACKSONVILLE DIVISION

ROBINSON IMPROVEMENT COMPANY,

a Florida corporation

Plaintiff,

Case No. 3:25-cv-01275-TJC-LLL

v.

ST. JOHNS COUNTY, FLORIDA

Defendant.

_______________________________/

Uniform Case Management Report

The goal of this case management report is to “secure the just, speedy, and

inexpensive determination of” the action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 1. Under Local Rule

3.02(a)(2), this case management report should be used in all civil cases except those

described in Local Rule 3.02(d). Individual judges may have additional case

management preferences that can be found under each judge’s name on the Court’s

website, flmd.uscourts.gov/judges/all.

1. Date and Attendees

The parties may conduct the planning conference “in person, by telephone, or by

comparable means[.]” See Local Rule 3.02(a)(1).

The parties conducted the planning conference on 3/5/2026. Zach Miller, Esq. for

the Plaintiff and Jennifer C. Barron, Esq. for Defendant attended the conference.

2. Deadlines and Dates

The parties request these deadlines and dates:

Action or Event Date

Deadline for providing mandatory initial disclosures. See Fed. R. Civ.

P. 26(a)(1). 5/1/2026Case 3:25-cv-01275-TJC-LLL Document 20 Filed 03/10/26 Page 2 of 6 PageID 401

Deadline for moving to join a party, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 14, 19, and 20,

or amend the pleadings, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). 8/1/2026

Deadline for serving expert disclosures under Rule 26(a)(2),

including any report required by Rule 26(a)(2)(B). Plaintiff Defendant Rebuttal 11/1/2026

12/1/2026

3/1/2027

Deadline for completing discovery and filing any motion to compel

discovery. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37; Middle District Discovery (2021).

2/1/2027

Deadline for moving for class certification, if applicable. See Fed. R.

Civ. P. 23(c).

N/A

Deadline for filing any dispositive and Daubert motion. See Fed. R. Civ.

P. 56. (Must be at least five months before requested trial date.) 3/1/2027

Deadline for participating in mediation. See Local Rules, ch. 4.

The Parties shall work in good faith to select a mediator.

4/1/2027

Date of the final pretrial meeting. See Local Rule 3.06(a). 8/15/2027

Deadline for filing the joint final pretrial statement, any motion in

limine, proposed jury instructions, and verdict form. See Local Rule

3.06(b). (Must be at least seven days before the final pretrial conference.)

8/22/2027

Date of the final pretrial conference. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(e); Local

Rule 3.06(b). 8/29/2027

Month and year of the trial term. (On declaratory and injunctive relief) 9/1/2027

Per the applicable law, the case is required to be bifurcated between

liability and damages. As such, the parties respectfully request that if

liability is found as to any of the claims that a new case management

report be entered outlining the schedule leading to trial on damages.

The trial will last approximately 5 days and be

☒ jury. (as to damages)

☒ non-jury. (as to declaratory and injunctive relief)

2Case 3:25-cv-01275-TJC-LLL Document 20 Filed 03/10/26 Page 3 of 6 PageID 402

3. Description of the Action

UNLAWFUL GOVERNMENT TAKING (FEDERAL AND STATE), EQUAL

PROTECTION, DUE PROCESS (FEDERAL AND STATE) AND DECLARATORY ACTION

(STATE).

DEFENDANT IS TAKING PLAINTIFF’S PROPERTY WITHOUT JUST

COMPENSATION. DEFENDANT ACTED IN AN ARBITRARY AND

CAPRCIOUS MANNER WITH RESPECT TO PLAINTIFF’S ATTEMPTS

AT SECURING PROPERTY RIGHTS THAT SERVE AS JUST

COMPENSATION FOR THE TAKING. DEFENDANT APPLIED TO

PLAINTIFF CRITERIA THAT IT DID NOT APPLY TO OTHER

SIMILARLY SITUATED APPLICANTS. DEFENDANT HAS

INORDINATELY BURDENED PLAINTIFF’S PROPERTY RIGHTS IN

VIOLATION OF FLORIDA LAW. IN DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

APPLICATION TO SECURE PROPETY RIGHTS THAT SERVE AS JUST

COMPENSATION FOR THE TAKING, DEFENDANT HAS VIOLATED

FLORIDA LAW THAT REQUIRES ZONING TO BE CONSISTENT WITH

ITS LOCAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. PLAINTIFF DETRIMENTALLY

RELIED ON ACTIONS AND STATEMENTS BY DEFENDANT

REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S ABILITY TO EXERCISE ITS RIGHTS TO

JUST COMPENSATION FOR THE TAKING.

DEFENDANT DENIES THE ALLEGATIONS.

AS TO THE CLAIMS PRESENTED, THE PARTIES AGREE THAT THE ISSUES ARE

REQUIRED TO BE BIFURCATED BETWEEN THE DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE

RELIEF (WHICH WOULD BE HANDLED AT A BENCH TRIAL) AND IF LIABILITY IS

FOUND AT SAID BENCH TRIAL, THEN A JURY TRIAL ON DAMAGES.

4. Disclosure Statement

☒ Each party has filed a disclosure statement using the required form.

5. Related Action

☒ The parties acknowledge their continuing duty under Local Rule 1.07(c) to

notify the judge of a related action pending in the Middle District or elsewhere by

filing a “Notice of a Related Action.” No notice need be filed if there are no related

actions as defined by the rule.

3Case 3:25-cv-01275-TJC-LLL Document 20 Filed 03/10/26 Page 4 of 6 PageID 403

6. Consent to a Magistrate Judge

“A United States magistrate judge in the Middle District can exercise the maximum

authority and perform any duty permitted by the Constitution and other laws of the United

States.” Local Rule 1.02(a). With the parties’ consent, a district judge can refer any civil

matter to a magistrate judge for any or all proceedings, including a non-jury or jury trial.

28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

The Court asks the parties and counsel to consider the benefits to the parties and the Court

of consenting to proceed before a magistrate judge. Consent can provide the parties

certainty and flexibility in scheduling. Consent is voluntary, and a party for any reason

can decide not to consent and continue before the district judge without adverse

consequences. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(2).

☐ The parties do consent and file with this case management report a completed

Form AO 85 “Notice, Consent, and Reference of a Civil Action to a Magistrate

Judge,” which is available on the Court’s website under “Forms.”

☒ The parties do not consent.

7. Preliminary Pretrial Conference

☒ The parties do not request a preliminary pretrial conference before the Court

enters a scheduling order.

☐ The parties do request a preliminary pretrial conference, and the parties want to

discuss enter discussion points.

8. Discovery Practice

The parties should read the Middle District Discovery Handbook, available on the Court’s

website at flmd.uscourts.gov/civil-discovery-handbook, to understand discovery practice

in this District.

☒ The parties confirm they will comply with their duty to confer with the opposing

party in a good faith effort to resolve any discovery dispute before filing a motion.

See Local Rule 3.01(g); Middle District Discovery (2021) at § I.A.2.

9. Discovery Plan

The parties submit the following discovery plan under Rule 26(f)(2):

4Case 3:25-cv-01275-TJC-LLL Document 20 Filed 03/10/26 Page 5 of 6 PageID 404

A. The parties agree to the timing, form, or requirement for disclosures under

Rule 26(a):

☒ Yes.

☐ No; instead, the parties agree to these changes: enter changes.

B. Discovery may be needed on these subjects: Communications and

materials to and from area residents who spoke against Plaintiff’s proposed

rezoning of the Plaintiff’s Property at various public hearings.

Communications and materials to and from local officials concerning

Plaintiff’s property.

Documentation and communications in Defendant’s possession

concerning Plaintiff’s Property and Plaintiff’s applications to rezone the

Property.

C. Discovery should be conducted in phases:

☐ No.

☒ Yes; Parties request second discovery phase as to damages if

declaratory and injunctive relief is found by the court at summary

judgment or at bench.

D. Are there issues about disclosure, discovery, or preservation of

electronically stored information?

☐ No.

☒ Yes; describe the issue(s). Plaintiff anticipates subpoenaing electronic

communications to and from third parties concerning Plaintiff’s property

and Plaintiff’s applications concerning the property.

E. ☒ The parties have considered privilege and work-product issues,

including whether to ask the Court to include any agreement in an order

under Federal Rule of Evidence 502(d).

F. The parties stipulate to changes to the limitations on discovery imposed

under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 3.04 or other

limitations:

☒ No.

☐ Yes; describe the stipulation.

5Case 3:25-cv-01275-TJC-LLL Document 20 Filed 03/10/26 Page 6 of 6 PageID 405

10. Request for Special Handling

☒ The parties do not request special handling.

☐ The parties request special handling. Specifically, describe requested special

handling.

☐ Enter party’s name unilaterally requests special handling. Specifically, describe

requested special handling.

11. Certification of familiarity with the Local Rules

☒ The parties certify that they have read and are familiar with the Court’s Local

Rules.

12. Signatures

Jennifer C. Barron, Esq Jennifer C. Barron, Esq Counsel for Defendant Zach Miller, Esq.

Zach Miller, Esq.

Counsel for Plaintiff

3/10/2026 3/10/2026

6