Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO: 00-2025, SECTION: "J" (1)
April 16, 2002
MINUTE ENTRY
Before the Court is Defendant Motiva Enterprise, L.L.C.'s Motion to File Motion for Summary Judgment, whereby Motiva seeks leave of the Court to file a motion for summary judgment outside of the March 12, 2002, deadline. Plaintiff opposes the motion. Upon reviewing the memoranda and the pleadings, the Court concludes that the motion should be DENIED.
Motiva's request is based on its averment that during the deposition of Plaintiff's expert, Fred Liebkernann, taken on March 7, 2002, a new theory of liability was asserted by Plaintiff. Specifically, Motiva claims that Mr. Liebkemann, for the first time, rendered an opinion that a defective gasket supplied by Motiva would be a liability issue in the case. Accordingly, Motiva requests that it be allowed to file a motion for summary judgment addressing this issue.
First, the Court notes that its understanding has always been that, according to the Plaintiff, the allegedly defective gasket played a role in causing his injuries, as evidenced by various pleadings in this case. Additionally, as Plaintiff argues in his opposition, Motiva took Plaintiff's deposition in July 2001, during which deposition, Plaintiff testified regarding the fact he had to change the "bad gasket." That was nearly a year ago. Furthermore, Mr. Liebkemann's deposition was taken on March 7, 2002, over a month before Motiva filed the instant motion.
In light of the upcoming trial date of May 13, 2002, the fact that Motiva did not act more expeditiously on this matter, and that, in the court's opinion, Plaintiff's expert is not propounding a new theory, the Court concludes that Motiva's motion should be and is hereby DENIED.