Opinion
Case No. 2:08-cv-315.
July 9, 2009
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court for consideration of Defendant's June 17, 2009 motion to bifurcate. (Doc. # 65.) Defendant requests this Court to bifurcate liability from damages, or in the alternative, bifurcate the punitive damages claim in this litigation so that the jury will address the compensatory damages issue in the initial stage of trial followed, if necessary, by the punitive damages issue in the second stage of trial. For the alternate request, Defendants cite to Ohio Rev. Code § 2315.21(B)(1). Plaintiff has not filed a memorandum in opposition to the motion, and the filing deadline has passed.
The Court DENIES the motion with respect to the bifurcation of liability and damages and GRANTS the motion with respect to the alternate request for bifurcation of punitive damages from liability and compensatory damages. See Ohio Rev. Code § 2315.21(B)(1); Smith v. Glaxo Welcome, Inc., No. C-1-96-540, 1998 WL 34024762, at *1 (S.D. Ohio June 11, 1998) (ordering bifurcation of punitive damages based upon application of former § 2315.21(B)(1)). See also S.D. Ohio Civ. R. 7.2(a)(2) ("Failure to file a memorandum in opposition may be cause for the Court to grant any Motion, other than one which would result directly in entry of final judgment or an award of attorney fees.").
IT IS SO ORDERED.