Massoli v. Regan Media, et al

Filing 39

Massoli v. Regan Media, et al

Doc. 39

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

STEPTOE & JOHNSON LLP Collier Center 201 East Washington Street, Suite 1600 Phoenix, Arizona 85004-2382 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] David J. Bodney (006065) Dennis K. Blackhurst (021678) Attorneys for Defendants/Counterclaimants Regan Media, Inc. and Judith Regan UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA JENNA MASSOLI p/k/a JENNA JAMESON, Plaintiff, vs. " EGAN MEDIA," JUDITH R and REGAN, an individual, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CV 05-0854 PHX EHC REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SUR-RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF/ COUNTERDEFENDANTS' RULE 56(F) MOTION [Oral Argument Requested] (Assigned to the Honorable Earl H. Carroll)

REGAN MEDIA, INC., a New York corporation, and JUDITH REGAN, an individual, Defendants/Counterclaimants, vs. JENNA MASSOLI p/k/a JENNA JAMESON, an individual, Plaintiff/Counterdefendant, and JAY GRDINA, an individual, Third-Party Counterdefendant.

Case 2:05-cv-00854-EHC

Document 39

Filed 08/16/2005

Page 1 of 4
Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

The Motion filed by Defendants/Counterclaimants Regan Media, Inc. and Judith Regan (collectively, " efendants" for leave to file a Sur-Response in Opposition to D ) Plaintiff/Counterdefendants' Rule 56(f) Motion should be granted. On June 17, 2005, Plaintiff/Counterdefendant Jenna Massoli p/k/a Jenna Jameson and Third-Party Counterdefendant Jay Grdina (collectively, "ameson" filed a Rule 56(f) Motion arguing J ) that the Agreement between the parties is ambiguous and that extrinsic evidence is necessary to clarify the intent of the parties. In her brief, Jameson argued that (1) the term " elevision Networks"is ambiguous (Rule 56(f) Motion at 6); (2) the term " ther T O Potential Financiers"is ambiguous (id. at 7); and (3) the term "urther"is ambiguous. F [Id.] Jameson also argued that Defendants' Rule 12(c) Motion should be converted to a motion for summary judgment and that the parties' pleadings are at odds, precluding judgment on the pleadings. [Id. at 8-11.] Defendants filed their Response to this Motion on July 1, 2005. In her Reply filed on July 18, 2005, Jameson offered an entirely different argument, now maintaining that she did not actually enter into a contract with A&E. She also suggested for the first time that the term " ny Similar Projects" ambiguous. Neither of A is these arguments was made in her initial Rule 56(f) Motion. Jameson also attached the A&E Contract, a document Defendants had never seen. Because Jameson raised new arguments and submitted an entirely new document in her Reply brief, it is only fair that Defendants be given an opportunity to respond to these new arguments.

2
Case 2:05-cv-00854-EHC Document 39 Filed 08/16/2005 Page 2 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Defendants respectfully request that the Court enter an order allowing Defendants to file a signed version of the Sur-Response previously submitted as Exhibit A to Defendants Motion for Leave to File Sur-Response. Respectfully submitted this 16th day of August, 2005. STEPTOE & JOHNSON LLP

By s/David J. Bodney David J. Bodney Dennis K. Blackhurst Collier Center 201 East Washington Street, Suite 1600 Phoenix, Arizona 85004-2382 Attorneys for Defendants/Counterclaimants

3
Case 2:05-cv-00854-EHC Document 39 Filed 08/16/2005 Page 3 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on the 16th day of August, 2005, I caused the attached document to be electronically transmitted to the Clerk'Office using the CM/ECF System s for filing and transmittal of a Notice of Electric Filing to the following CM/ECF Registrants: James L. Blair Roger William Hall Renaud Cook Drury Mesaros, PA Phelps Dodge Tower One North Central, Suite 900 Phoenix, AZ 85004-4417 Attorneys for Plaintiff/Counterdefendant and Third-Party Counterdefendant I hereby certify that on 16th day of August, 2005, I served the attached document by mail on the following, who are not registered participants of the CM/ECF System: Bernard M. Brodsky Jeffrey F. Reina Lipsitz, Green, Fahringer, Roll, Salisbury & Cambria, LLP 42 Delaware Avenue, Suite 300 Buffalo, NY 14202-3857 Attorneys for Plaintiff/Counterdefendant and Third-Party Counterdefendant s/Kelly Volkman Kelly Volkman

477934

4
Case 2:05-cv-00854-EHC Document 39 Filed 08/16/2005 Page 4 of 4