Lyman et al v. Asbestos Defendants (B*P) et al
Filing
134
ORDER GRANTING AND SEVERING DEFENDANT MONTELLO INC.'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND ANSWER TO ASSERT CROSS-CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANT UNION CARBIDE by Hon. William H. Orrick re 111 Motion for Leave to File. Montello is granted leave to amend its a nswer to assert a cross-claim for indemnification against Union Carbide. The trial of the indemnification issue is severed and a Case Management Conference is set for August 5, 2014, at 2:00 p.m. to discuss an appropriate schedule for discovery and trial. On or before July 29, 2014, the defendants shall file a Joint Case Management Statement that includes a proposed case management schedule. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/2/2014)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
ROBERT F. LYMAN, et al.,
Case No. 07-cv-04240-WHO
Plaintiffs,
8
v.
9
10
UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION, et al.,
Defendants.
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
ORDER GRANTING AND SEVERING
DEFENDANT MONTELLO INC.’S
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND
ANSWER TO ASSERT CROSS-CLAIM
AGAINST DEFENDANT UNION
CARBIDE
Re: Dkt. No. 111
12
13
More than seven years after making its first appearance in this case, and less than a month
14
before trial of the claims of the heirs of Robert Lyman, defendant Montello, Inc., moved to amend
15
its answer so that it could assert an indemnity claim against co-defendant Union Carbide
16
Corporation. This matter is capable of resolution without oral argument and the hearing set for
17
June 4, 2014, is VACATED.
18
There are potentially valid grounds for Montello to seek indemnification based on a written
19
agreement with Union Carbide. But until this motion was filed on May 20, 2014, nothing in
20
Montello’s pleadings indicated that it would be pursuing a cross-claim against Union Carbide.
21
Montello contends that it acted promptly once this case was set for trial, but that is not the test for
22
timeliness.
23
Fairness dictates that Union Carbide be given the opportunity to conduct discovery and
24
consider its litigation and trial strategy prior to the presentation of the indemnification issue for
25
decision. It is inappropriate at this late date to inject a fight between the co-defendants over
26
indemnification into the trial of Mr. Lyman’s heirs’ claims for negligence and products liability
27
arising from Mr. Lyman’s alleged exposure to asbestos.
28
Accordingly, I GRANT Montello, Inc., leave to amend its answer to assert a cross-claim
1
for indemnification against Union Carbide. I SEVER trial of the indemnification issue and set a
2
Case Management Conference for August 5, 2014, at 2:00 p.m. to discuss an appropriate schedule
3
for discovery and trial. On or before July 29, 2014, the defendants shall file a Joint Case
4
Management Statement that includes a proposed case management schedule.
5
6
7
8
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 2, 2014
______________________________________
WILLIAM H. ORRICK
United States District Judge
9
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?