Massoli v. Regan Media, et al

Filing 82

Massoli v. Regan Media, et al

Doc. 82

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 27 28 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff/Counterdefendant and Counterdefendant's M ot ion for Determination that Arizona Law Applies to this M at t er. [Dkt. 34]. The M ot ion is fully briefed. J E N N A M A SSO L I JAM ESON, J E N N A) ) ) Plaint iff, ) ) ) vs. ) REGAN M EDIA and JUDITH REGAN, an) ) individual, ) Defendant s. ) ) RE GAN M EDIA, INC., a New York) corp orat ion, and JUDITH REGAN, an) ) individual, ) Defendant s/C o u n t e r c l a i m ant s,) ) ) vs. ) J E N N A M A SSO L I , p / k/a J E N N A) ) JAM ESON, an individual, ) ) Plaint iff/Count erdefendant , ) ) and ) ) JAY GRDINA, an individual, ) ) Count erdefendant . ) p /k /a No. CIV 05-0854-PHX-EHC O RDER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Case 2:05-cv-00854-EHC

Document 82

Filed 02/21/2006

Page 1 of 2
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 27 28

T he M ot ion for Determination was filed because the parties disputed the ap p licable law in the briefing concerning Defendants/Counterclaimants' M ot ion for Judgment on the Pleadings [dkt. 15] and Plaintiff/Counterdefendant and Count erdefendant 's Rule 56(f) M ot ion [dkt. 19, p. 5]. The Court found those M ot ions were mooted by subsequent amendment to the Complaint. [Dkt. 51]. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff/Counterdefendant and Counterdefendant's M ot ion for Determination that Arizona Law Applies to this M at t er [dkt. 34] is DENIED as moot, without prejudice to reurging. DATED this 18th day of February, 2006.

Case 2:05-cv-00854-EHC

Document 82

-2Filed 02/21/2006

Page 2 of 2