From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Weitz Co. v. Capitol Peak Lodge Condo. Ass'n, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Nov 22, 2013
Civil Action No. 13-cv-01179-REB-MJW (D. Colo. Nov. 22, 2013)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 13-cv-01179-REB-MJW

11-22-2013

THE WEITZ COMPANY, LLC, BAKER CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION, INC., LAFARGE WEST, INC., and BASE VILLAGE OWNER, LLC, Plaintiffs, v. CAPITOL PEAK LODGE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., Defendant.


Judge Robert E. Blackburn


ORDER ADOPTING RECOMMENDATION OF THE

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Blackburn, J.

The matter before me is the magistrate judge's Recommendation on Defendant's Motion To Dismiss Pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) (Docket No. 22) [#47], filed October 31, 2013. No timely objection having been filed, I review the recommendation for plain error only. See Morales-Fernandez v. Immigration & Naturalization Service, 418 F.3d 1116, 1122 (10th Cir. 2005). Finding no such error in the magistrate judge's recommended disposition, I find and conclude that the recommendation should be approved and adopted.

"[#47]" is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to a specific paper by the court's electronic case filing and management system (CM/ECF). I use this convention throughout this order.

THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows:

1. That the Recommendation on Defendant's Motion To Dismiss Pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) (Docket No. 22) [#47], filed October 31 2013, is APPROVED AND ADOPTED as an order of this court;

2. That Defendant's Motion To Dismiss Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) [#22], filed June 2428, 2013, is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED AS MOOT IN PART as follows:

a. That the motion is GRANTED to the extent it seeks to dismiss this case based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction in this court; and
b. That in all other respects, the motion is DENIED AS MOOT;

3. That plaintiff's claims in this matter are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of subject matter jurisdiction in this court;

4. That judgment without prejudice SHALL ENTER on behalf of defendant, Capitol Peak Lodge Condominium Association, Inc., a Colorado nonprofit corporation, against plaintiffs, The Weitz Company, LLC, an Iowa limited liability company; Baker Concrete Construction, Inc., an Ohio corporation; LaFarge West, Inc., a Delaware corporation; and Base Village Owner, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, jointly and severally, on all claims for relief and causes of action;

5. That all pretrial deadlines, the Trial Preparation Conference set April 4, 2014, at 2:30 p.m., and the bench trial set April 7, 2014, are VACATED; and

6. That defendant is AWARDED its costs, to be taxed by the clerk of the court pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(1) and D.C.COLO.LCivR 54.1.

Dated November 22, 2013, at Denver, Colorado.

_______________

Robert E. Blackburn

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Weitz Co. v. Capitol Peak Lodge Condo. Ass'n, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Nov 22, 2013
Civil Action No. 13-cv-01179-REB-MJW (D. Colo. Nov. 22, 2013)
Case details for

Weitz Co. v. Capitol Peak Lodge Condo. Ass'n, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:THE WEITZ COMPANY, LLC, BAKER CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION, INC., LAFARGE WEST…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Nov 22, 2013

Citations

Civil Action No. 13-cv-01179-REB-MJW (D. Colo. Nov. 22, 2013)