From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lofton v. FedEx Ground Package Sys., Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Dec 5, 2012
Civil Action No. 12-cv-02707-RPM (D. Colo. Dec. 5, 2012)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 12-cv-02707-RPM

12-05-2012

ALAN LOFTON and ALNTCB, INC., Plaintiff, v. FedEx GROUND PACKAGE SYSTEM, INCORPORATED, Defendants.


Senior District Judge Richard P. Matsch


ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO AMEND RESPONSE TO MOTION TO COMPEL

ARBITRATION

Upon review of Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion to Amend Response to Defendant's Motion to Compel Arbitration [26] filed December 4, 2012, it is

ORDERED that the motion is granted.

BY THE COURT:

_________________

Richard P. Matsch, Senior District Judge
NOTES FOR HEARING

Alan Lofton had a written contract with RPS, Inc., to deliver packages. It is dated January 22, 2001, and is attached to the defendant's motion to compel arbitration. In this case Lofton alleges that the contract was taken over by a corporation of his formation ALNTCB, Inc., and his first claim for relief is that the defendant interfered with the contractual relation between Lofton and his corporation when it determined that he could not be a driver. That determination may be based on allegations of misconduct between Lofton and Dawn Martin, an employee of the defendant. The plaintiffs filed seven claims for relief. Lofton's claims are first, tortious interference with contract; second, defamation; third, constitutional rights to freedom of association and firearms; and seven, implied contract and promissory estoppel. The defendant has filed a motion to dismiss those claims for insufficiency of the allegations of the amended complaint.

The fourth, fifth and sixth claims are based on termination of contract and as to those claims the defendant has filed a motion to compel arbitration.

The plaintiffs' position is not clear as to the contracting party. If it is the corporation, Alan Lofton would not be a party and including him in the contract claims is inconsistent with the first claim for relief of interference. The defense to the motion to arbitrate is that there is no written agreement between the corporation and the defendant so there is no arbitration clause.

BY THE COURT:

_________________

Richard P. Matsch, Senior Judge


Summaries of

Lofton v. FedEx Ground Package Sys., Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Dec 5, 2012
Civil Action No. 12-cv-02707-RPM (D. Colo. Dec. 5, 2012)
Case details for

Lofton v. FedEx Ground Package Sys., Inc.

Case Details

Full title:ALAN LOFTON and ALNTCB, INC., Plaintiff, v. FedEx GROUND PACKAGE SYSTEM…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Dec 5, 2012

Citations

Civil Action No. 12-cv-02707-RPM (D. Colo. Dec. 5, 2012)