Judge orders parties to file Rule 11 and joint scheduling proposal in YMCA child-abuse case

Judge Amy Clark Meacham told attorneys in Trevino v. Browning and YMCA of Central Texas on May 27 that she would reissue scheduling deadlines for a jury trial reset to Sept. 22, 2025 if the parties produced a filed Rule 11 agreement and a proposed scheduling order.

The request came at a docket-control conference during which plaintiff's counsel, Ryan Toomey, said the case involves allegations of child abuse in a YMCA classroom and that parties had previously sought a continuance from a May 5 trial setting. Toomey said the parties had been able to conduct substantial discovery, including depositions of the plaintiffs and an upcoming deposition of the YMCA's representative.

Meacham said she found an April 7 order by Judge Cantu Huxell continuing the May 5 jury trial to Sept. 22, 2025 and asked counsel whether the trial had been administratively reset with court staff. After confirming the Sept. 22 setting, the judge focused on what remaining deadlines were necessary to prepare for trial and directed defense counsel to file an amended scheduling order if they sought different deadlines than the plaintiff's proposed order.

The judge also required a Rule 11 agreement to be placed on the court's file before she would sign a differing scheduling order. She told defense counsel, "You've got homework, Miss Raminelli. You've got two things that you've got to do. You've got to file the Rule 11, and you have to send me a proposed version of a scheduling order that you would like for the court to sign." She gave the parties until the close of business the next day and said she would aim to act later that week.

Discussion at the hearing reflected a disagreement about whether all prior scheduling deadlines should be reset. Plaintiff counsel asked that only the remaining pretrial and rebuttal-expert deadlines be set based on the Sept. 22 trial date rather than redoing all earlier deadlines. Defense counsel said they wished to extend other deadlines, including new-parties and expert designation dates, and referenced an independent medical examination (IME) performed April 18 as a basis for an expert-deadline adjustment. The court said it needed the Rule 11 agreement on file and a proposed order that reflected any new dates the parties wanted the court to adopt.

Judge Meacham did not enter a written scheduling order at the hearing. Instead she directed the parties to file the Rule 11 stipulation and submit a proposed scheduling order through the court's submission portal and said she would pick a day later in the week to rule.

Ending: The court set a firm administrative target: file the Rule 11 agreement and any proposed scheduling order by close of business the following day so the judge can issue deadlines necessary to proceed toward the Sept. 22 jury trial.