Opinion
20-CV-0784-L-JLB
09-12-2022
HOMEFED VILLAGE III MASTER, LLC, Plaintiff, v. OTAY LANDFILL, INC.; et al, Defendants.
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT OTAY LANDFILL INC.'S EX PARTE MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION [ECF NO. 110]
Hon. M. James Lorenz, United States District Judge
Before the Court is Defendant Otay Landfill, Inc. (“OLI”) Ex Parte Motion for Clarification of ECF # 107 [ECF No. 110]. OLI requests clarification of this Court's August 26, 2022, Order granting OLI permission to file an oversize omnibus brief. (Ord. [ECF No. 107.]) Defendant American Recycling International, Inc., (“LKQ”), opposes OLI's request. (Oppo. [ECF No. 111.]
On July 20, 2022, Defendant OLI filed an ex parte motion requesting permission to file “memoranda for its combined motions for summary judgment, partial summary judgment, adjudication of undisputed facts and supporting motion to exclude expert testimony regarding the Second Amended Complaint of Plaintiff HomeFed Village III Master LLC.” (Ex Parte Motion at 2 [ECF No. 87.])
Prior to this Court's ruling on the Ex Parte Motion, Defendant OLI filed two motions with the same hearing date of September 26, 2022: (1) a Motion for Summary Judgment on the Crossclaims of Defendant American Recycling International aka LKQ, and Motion to Exclude Report and Testimony of Expert Witness Sin Senh, that was eighteen (18) pages in length, and (2) a Motion for Summary Judgment and Motions to Exclude Report and Testimony of Expert Gary McCue against Plaintiff HomeFed Village III Master, LLC, that was twenty-five (25) pages in length. The combined length of the two motions with the same hearing date was forty-three (43) pages.
On August 26, 2022, the motions were stricken pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7.1(h) for being oversized. [ECF No. 104.] Civil Local Rule 7.1(h) mandates that “[b]riefs or memoranda in support of or in opposition to all motions noticed for the same motion day must not exceed a total of twenty-five (25) pages in length, per party, for all such motions without leave of the judge who will hear the motion.” Civ.L.Rule 7.1(h)(emphasis added). “When the same party is noticing multiple motions for the same hearing date, the motions must be briefed together in one memorandum of points and authorities.” (Lorenz Standing Order for Civil Cases at 2)(emphasis added).
Also on August 26, 2022, the Court granted OLI's Ex Parte Application for Leave to File Summary Judgment Memorandum with Additional Pages ordering that “Defendant Otay Landfill, Inc.'s Points and Authorities Memorandum in Support of its Motions for Summary Judgment, Partial Summary Judgment and/or Summary Adjudication of Undisputed Facts and Motion to Exclude Expert Testimony (“Omnibus Motion”) shall not exceed 30 pages.” (Order [ECF No. 107).
OLI argues that their ex parte request for additional pages applied only to briefing against HomeFed, not to motions filed against LKQ. (Ex Parte Clarification at 2). However, the Local Rules and Judge Lorenz's Standing Order are clear that motions noticed for the same day must be briefed together, as an omnibus motion. Thus, the Order permitting additional pages was directed at both OLI motions filed with the same hearing date and mandates a combined total for both motions of 30 pages, if they continue to have the same hearing date.
OLI further argues that the Court's Order unfairly permits both HomeFed and LKQ thirty (30) pages for any Opposition memoranda, for a total of sixty (60) pages of opposition memoranda. (Mot. at 2). Rule 7.1(h) provides that any opposition to a motion noticed for the same day “must not exceed a total of twenty-five (25) pages in length, per party.” Civ.L.Rule 7.1(h)(emphasis added) Accordingly, both LKQ and HomeFed may file opposition briefs no longer than thirty (30) pages if the motions have the same hearing date, per this Court's Order.
Should OLI choose to file motions against LKQ and HomeFed, they must be briefed together if they have the same hearing date, and the briefing must not exceed thirty (30) pages as noted in the Court's Order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.