Opinion
NO. 2:17-cv-00288-SAB
10-19-2018
DAVID M. LEVIN and TERESA JAN LEVIN, husband and wife, Plaintiffs, v. PACIFIC HIDE & FUR DEPOT, d/b/a PACIFIC STEEL & PACIFIC RECYCLING, a Montana corporation, KYLE DOE AND JANE DOE, husband and wife, GORDON BECK AND JANE DOE BECK, husband and wife; INLAND NORTHWEST EQUIPMENT AUCTION, INC., d/b/a/ REINLAND AUCTIONEERS, a Washington corporation; IBEX CONSTRUCTION, INC., a Washington corporation; TIM AND ROBERTA JACKSON, husband and wife; Defendants.
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT PACIFIC HIDE & PACIFIC RECYCLING'S MOTION TO AMEND ANSWER; GRANTING DEFENDANT BECK'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Before the Court are Defendant Gordon Beck's Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 39; Defendant Pacific Hide & Pacific Recycling's Motion to Strike Paragraphs 19 and 20 of Defendant Beck's Statements of Facts and Exhibit C thereto, ECF No. 53; Defendant Gordon Beck's Motion to Strike Declaration of Annette M. Sandberg, ECF No. 61; Defendant Pacific Hide & Pacific Recycling's Motion for Leave to Amend Answer, ECF No. 66; Defendant Pacific Hide & Pacific Recycling's Motion to Strike Portions of Defendant Gordon Beck's Reply to Responses in Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 68; and related Motions to Expedite, ECF Nos. 62, 69.
Defendant Pacific Hide & Fur Depot refers to itself in its Motions as Pacific Hide & Pacific Recycling. --------
Defendant Gordon Beck moved for summary judgment on those claims asserted against him by Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs did not respond to the motion. The parties indicate that Plaintiffs have stipulated to the dismissal of claims against Defendant Beck, although the Court was unable to locate any stipulation in the record. Based on these representations, the Court grants Defendant Gordon Beck's Motion for Summary Judgment.
Defendant Pacific Hide & Pacific Recycling asks for leave to amend its answer to include cross-claims for negligence and contribution against the other Defendants. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15 instructs the Court to freely give leave when justice so requires. Defendant Gordon Beck objects, but has not demonstrated how he would be prejudiced if the Court grants Defendant leave to file an amended answer.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED:
1. Defendant Gordon Beck's Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 39, is GRANTED. The District Court is directed to enter judgment in favor of Defendant and against Plaintiffs with respect to those claims asserted against it by Plaintiffs.
2. Defendant Pacific Hide & Pacific Recycling's Motion for Leave to Amend Answer, ECF No. 66, is GRANTED.
3. Defendant Pacific Hide & Pacific Recycling is granted leave to file an Amended Answer.
4. Defendant Pacific Hide & Pacific Recycling's Motion to Strike Paragraphs 19 and 20 of Defendant Beck's Statements of Facts and Exhibit C thereto, ECF No. 53, is DENIED, as moot.
5. Defendant Gordon Beck's Motion to Strike Declaration of Annette M. Sandberg, ECF No. 61, is DENIED, as moot.
6. Defendant Pacific Hide & Pacific Recycling's Motion to Strike Portions of Defendant Gordon Beck's Reply to Responses in Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 68, is DENIED, as moot.
7. Defendant Gordon Beck's Motion to Expedite, ECF No. 62, is GRANTED.
8. Defendant Pacific Hide & Pacific Recycling's Motion to Expedite, ECF No. 69, is GRANTED.
IT IS SO ORDERED. The District Court Clerk is hereby directed to enter this Order and to provide copies to counsel.
DATED this 19th day of October 2018.
/s/_________
Stanley A. Bastian
United States District Judge