## Facts

- Arabian American Oil Company (Aramco) sued Lee Letterio Scarfone and related parties over alleged fraud and misconduct in architectural-services contracts connected to projects in Saudi Arabia.
- Scarfone asserted counterclaims, including racketeering-related and contract-based claims.
- The litigation had been pending for several years, involved extensive discovery, and was expected to require a lengthy and costly jury trial.
- As trial approached, the court ordered the parties to participate in a summary jury trial, a court-directed, settlement-oriented proceeding in which counsel present abbreviated cases to an advisory jury.
- Co-defendants Robert Work and Jerry Konidaris moved to be excused from the summary jury trial.
- Work argued settlement was not realistically possible, making the procedure futile.
- Konidaris, who lived and worked in Greece, argued that mandatory participation would impose prohibitive logistical and financial burdens.

## Issues

1. Whether a federal district court may compel parties and counsel to participate in a summary jury trial as part of its inherent authority and Rule 16 case-management powers.
2. Whether mandatory participation in a nonbinding summary jury trial is improper or violates due process when a party claims settlement is unlikely or participation is financially burdensome, including for an overseas defendant.

## Decision

- The court denied Work’s and Konidaris’s motions to be excused.
- The court held it had authority to order a summary jury trial and require attendance and participation by parties and counsel.
- The court treated the procedure as nonbinding and as a pretrial device aimed at facilitating settlement without impairing the right to a full jury trial on the merits.
- The court concluded that assertions of settlement futility and claimed financial/logistical hardship did not justify exemption in this case.

## Legal Principles

- Federal district courts have broad discretion and inherent authority to control their dockets and manage complex litigation efficiently.
- Rule 16 authorizes active judicial management of pretrial proceedings, including measures intended to facilitate settlement and streamline trial.
- A court may require participation in nonbinding, advisory proceedings (including a summary jury trial) when the procedure does not determine parties’ rights and does not supplant a later jury trial.
- A party’s belief that settlement is unlikely does not, by itself, defeat a court’s authority to require participation in court-ordered settlement-oriented processes.
- Financial or logistical burdens, including those associated with a party’s overseas location, are generally addressed through reasonable accommodations rather than categorical exemption absent a showing that the order exceeds the court’s discretion or results in unfairness.

## Conclusion

The court upheld its power to compel participation in a nonbinding summary jury trial as a case-management and settlement-facilitation tool, rejecting objections based on predicted settlement failure and the claimed cost and inconvenience of attendance, including for an overseas defendant.


Arabian Am. Oil Co. v. Scarfone, 119 F.R.D. 448 (M.D. Fla. 1988)