Opinion
Case No. 2:17-cv-00071-RFB-NJK
07-06-2017
RITA LATHAM, Plaintiff(s), v. TUTOR PERINI BUILDING CORP., et al., Defendant(s).
ORDER (Docket Nos. 25, 26, 27, 28)
Pending before the Court are Defendants Tutor Perini Building Corporation's and Tutor Perini Corporation's motion for leave to amend the answer and file a third-party complaint (Docket No. 25), motion to withdraw that preceding motion (Docket No. 26), renewed motion for leave to file a third-party complaint (Docket No. 27), and stipulation to file a third-party complaint (Docket No. 28). In light of the parties' stipulation, the Court hereby DENIES as moot the motions at Docket Nos. 25, 26, and 27. For the reasons discussed below, the Court hereby GRANTS the stipulation at Docket No. 28.
When a defendant seeks to file a third-party complaint more than 14 days after answering the complaint, it must obtain leave of court. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 14(a)(1). Rule 14 is liberally construed to permit joinder of third party claims. E.g., United States v. Pioneer Lumber Treating Co., 496 F. Supp. 199, 202-03 (E.D. Wash. 1980). "Rule 14 was designed to provide for the adjudication of rights of all persons involved in a controversy in order to avoid circuity of actions and multiplicity of suits." Nevada Eighty-Eight, Inc. v. Title Ins. Co. of Minn., 753 F. Supp. 1516, 1529 (D. Nev. 1990). "Joinder under Rule 14(a) should be 'freely granted to promote efficiency unless to do so would prejudice the plaintiff, unduly complicate the trial, or would foster an obviously unmeritorious claim.'" FMC Corp. v. Vendo Co., 196 F. Supp. 2d 1023, 1038 (E.D. Cal. 2002) (quoting New York v. Solvent Chem. Co., 179 F.R.D. 90, 93 (W.D.N.Y. 1998)).
Applying these standards here and in light of the lack of any opposition, the Court GRANTS the stipulation. Defendants shall file the third-party complaint by July 13, 2017, and shall serve it. Cf. Local Rule 15-1(b).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: July 6, 2017
/s/_________
NANCY J. KOPPE
United States Magistrate Judge