Gagan, et al v. Sharar, et al

Filing 519

ORDER - ORDERED denying 515 Defendant James Monroe's Motion/Request for Evidentiary Hearing/Oral Argument. FURTHER ORDERED denying 517 Plaintiff's Joinder in Defendant Monroe's Motion/Request for Oral Argument and Motion for Expedited Hearing. (See attached Order for details.) Signed by Senior Judge Robert C Broomfield on 1/6/2014.(TLB)

1

WO

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

James L Gagan,
Plaintiff,

10

No. CV-99-01427-PHX-RCB
No. CV-13-01113-PHX-RCB
ORDER

11

v.

12

Victor E Sharar, et al.,

13

Defendants.

14
15

Defendant James Monroe, as well as the defendants in Gagan v. Monroe, No. CV-

16

13-011113 (“Gagan II”), are requesting that the court set an evidentiary hearing and oral

17
18

argument on defendant Monroe’s pending motion to dismiss (Doc. 494). Mot. (Doc.

19

515). The defendants give no reasons for either aspect of this request. On December 20,

20

2013, plaintiff Gagan joined in this defense request. “Plaintiff’s Joinder in Defendant

21

Monroe’s Request for Oral Argument and Motion for Expedited Hearing” (Doc. 517).

22
23

Plaintiff also does not offer any reasons for requesting oral argument. However, he

24

expressly opposes defendant Monroe’s request for an evidentiary hearing because the

25

defense motion to dismiss presents a purely legal issue. Essentially viewing defendant

26
27
28

Monroe’s motion to dismiss as a means “to continue to stymie and delay [his] discovery
efforts both in this case and in” Gagan II, id. at 2:4-5, plaintiff Gagan also is requesting

1
2

that the court consider the motion to dismiss on an expedited basis. Id. at 1:24-25.
Given the court’s intimate familiarity with this action and Fidelity Nat. Financial,

3
4
5
6

Inc. v. Friedman, No. CV-03-1222-PHX-RCB, which is the primary basis for defendant
Monroe’s dismissal argument, and because the issues have been fully briefed, in its
discretion, the court denies the parties’ requests for an evidentiary hearing and oral

7
8

argument as it would not aid the decisional process. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 78(b); Partridge v.

9

Reich, 141 F.3d 920, 926 (9th Cir. 1998). The court also denies plaintiff Gagan’s request

10

to consider the defense motion on an expedited basis. Any urgency is mitigated by the

11

court’s prior orders staying discovery in this action (Doc. 518) and granting, inter alia,

12
13

defendant Monroe’s motion to suspend deadlines and for a protective order in the closely

14

related Gagan II action (Doc. 33).

15

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

16
17
18
19

(1) Defendant James Monroe’s “Request for Evidentiary Hearing/Oral Argument”
(Doc. 515) is DENIED; and
(2) “Plaintiff’s Joinder in Defendant Monroe’s Request for Oral Argument and

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Motion for Expedited Hearing” (Doc. 517) is DENIED.
Dated this 6th day of January, 2014.