Court to Bifurcate a Case and Try Discrete Issues Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(b) (“Rule 42(b)”) provides in part: “For convenience, to avoid prejudice, or to expedite and economize, the court may order a separate trial of one or more separate issues, claims, crossclaims, counterclaims, or third-party claims.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(b); Fed. R. Bankr.P. 7042 (applying Fed. R. Crv. P. 42 in bankruptcy adversary proceedings). Rule 42(b) confers “broad discretion” on the court “to bifurcate a trial to permit deferral of costly and possibly unnecessary proceedings pending resolution of potentially dispositive preliminary issues.” Jinro America Inc. v. Secure Investments, Inc., 266 F. . Research, Inc. v. Mitchell Int’l, Inc., No. 09-2518-JAR, 2012 WL 5512340, at *1 (D.Kan. Nov. 14, 2012) (<HOLDING>); Flamand v. Am. Int’l Grp., Inc., 876 F.Supp.
holding portions of summary judgment motion in abeyance pending an evidentiary hearing holding crossmotions for summary judgment in abeyance conducting a fourday evidentiary hearing and then disposing of the motions holding an evidentiary hearing on the applicability of equitable estoppel holding summary judgment motions in abeyance for possible evidentiary hearing holding evidentiary hearing on defense of judicial estoppel after parties filed crossmotions for summary judgment