Plumley v. Service King Manufacturing Inc.

Filing 58

JUDGMENT granting 27 Motion for Summary Judgment against Gary and Anita Plumley and Service King; denying 36 Motion for Summary Judgment against Young Well Service; Service King Manufacturings claims against Young Well Service Company are DISMISS ED WITH PREJUDICE. Gary and Anita Plumley's claims against Young Well Service Company are also DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Third Party Plaintiff Service King Manufacturing Inc., Third Party Defendant Young Well Service Company, Inc., Cross Defendant Young Well Service Company, Inc., Cross Claimants Anita Plumley and Gary Plumley terminated. Signed by Honorable Harry F. Barnes on October 17, 2011. (cap)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
TEXARKANA DIVISION

GARY and ANITA PLUMLEY

VS.

PLAINTIFFS

CASE NO. 10-CV-4108

YOUNG WELL SERVICE COMPANY, INC.

DEFENDANT/
THIRD PARTY DEFENDANT

SERVICE KING MANUFACTURING, INC.

DEFENDANT/
THIRD PARTY PLAINTIFF/
INTERVENOR DEFENDANT

VS.
YOUNG WELL SERVICE COMPANY, INC.

THIRD PARTY DEFENDANT

AGCS MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY,
AS SUBROGEE OF YOUNG WELL
SERVICE COMPANY, INC.

INTERVENOR PLAINTIFF

JUDGMENT
Plaintiffs Gary and Anita Plumley filed an Amended Complaint against Defendants Service
King Manufacturing, Inc. (“Service King”) and Young Well Service Company, Inc. (“Young Well
Service”). (ECF No. 43). Defendant Service King filed a Third Party Complaint against coDefendant Young Well Service. (ECF. No. 11). This matter is now before the Court on Service
King and Young Well Service’s cross-motions for Summary Judgment. (ECF No. 27 and 36). Both
Service King and Young Well Service have responded. (ECF No. 35 and 50). Both parties have
replied. (ECF No. 50 and 52). The Court finds this matter ripe for consideration. For the reasons
discussed in the Memorandum Opinion of even date, the Court finds that Young Well Service
1

Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment against Gary and Anita Plumley and Service King (ECF
No. 27) is GRANTED. Service King’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 36) against
Young Well Service should be and hereby is DENIED. Service King Manufacturing’s claims
against Young Well Service Company are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Gary and Anita
Plumley’s claims against Young Well Service Company are also DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE.
IT IS SO ORDERED, this 17th day of October, 2011.
/s/ Harry F. Barnes
Hon. Harry F. Barnes
United States District Judge

2