Federal Trade Commission v. Ross-Clayton Funeral Home, Inc. et al
OPINION AND ORDER as follows: (1) The plaintiffs motion to strike third-partycounterclaims (doc. no. 41 ) is granted as further set out in the opinion and order. (2) All claims against purported third-party defendants Tonia C. Jackson, Cindy A. Lieb es, Michael Liggins, Edith Ramirez, and Jessica L. Rich are stricken from the first amended counterclaim (doc. no. 31 ), and said defendants are terminated as partiesto this action. (3) The defendants request (doc. no. 44 ) that the court direct th e clerk to open a new case and file the first amended counterclaim as a complaint under the new case action number is denied as further set out in the opinion and order. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 10/16/2015. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Appeals Checklist)(dmn, )
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,
ROSS-CLAYTON FUNERAL HOME, )
INC., an Alabama
corporation, et al.,
CIVIL ACTION NO.
OPINION AND ORDER
This cause is before the court on the Federal Trade
For the reasons below, the motion will
serve a summons and complaint on a nonparty who is or
motion, obtain the court's leave if it files the third-
party complaint more than 14 days after serving its
amended counterclaim”1 (doc. no. 31), which the court
parties, on June 23, 2015.
This was well over 14 days
after service of their original answer on May 12, 2015.
The defendants concede that they were required to but
Moreover, the July 31, 2015 deadline in the Uniform
Scheduling Order (doc. no. 27) for filing motions to
moving to amend the pleadings to add a counterclaim.2
Defendants concede that the counterclaim was untimely.
1. No counterclaim had been filed prior to this
2. In their response, the defendants point out that
they had an agreement with the plaintiff to extend the
Defendants argue that the court has jurisdiction
over the third-party defendants because they filed the
strike was filed by the “United States”, not by the
Strike (doc. no. 41) at 1; id. at 3 (“This motion does
alternative request that the court direct the clerk to
docket their counterclaim as a new complaint, under a
new case number.
As the defendants have not shown any
reason justifying this request, and have not properly
presented it to the court, the court will deny it.
* * *
deadline for discovery, but do not claim that they had
an agreement to extend the deadline for moving to add
parties or claims.
The agreement to extend discovery
Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows:
(1) The plaintiff’s motion to strike third-party
counterclaims (doc. no. 41) is granted.
defendants Tonia C. Jackson, Cindy A. Liebes, Michael
stricken from the “first amended counterclaim” (doc.
no. 31), and said defendants are terminated as parties
to this action.
(3) The defendants’ request (doc. no. 44) that the
court direct the clerk to open a new case and file the
first amended counterclaim as a complaint under the new
case action number is denied.
DONE, this the 16th day of October, 2015.
_ /s/ Myron H. Thompson
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?