Schara v. Toyota Motor Manufacturing Kentucky Inc

Filing 32

ORDER granting 30 Motion for Reconsideration. Ordered by Judge Clay D. Land on 03/19/2013.(aaf)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATHENS DIVISION CHRISTINE SCHARA, * Plaintiff, * vs. * TOYOTA MOTOR MANUFACTURING, KENTUCKY, INC., * CASE NO. 3:10-cv-57(CDL) * Defendant. * O R D E R The Court previously denied the summary judgment motion filed by Defendant Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. (“Toyota”) in this product liability action. Schara v. Toyota Motor Mfg., Ky., Inc., No. 3:10-cv-57(CDL), 2013 WL 790762, at *1 (M.D. Ga. Mar. 4, 2013). In that Order, the Court found that genuine issues of material fact exist as to whether Plaintiff Christine Schara’s (“Schara”) vehicle was defectively designed. Id. The Court failed to specifically address Schara’s punitive damages claim, although Toyota’s motion for sought summary judgment as to that claim. summary judgment Toyota now seeks reconsideration of the Court’s order asking that the Court grant partial summary judgment on Schara’s claim for punitive damages (ECF No. 30). judgment, Schara punitive damages. In response made no Thus, to Toyota’s argument Schara 1 motion regarding has for her abandoned summary claim that for claim. Resolution Trust Corp. v. Dunmar Corp., 43 F.3d 587, 599 (11th Cir. 1995). For that reason, the Court grants Toyota’s motion for reconsideration (ECF No. 30) and grants summary judgment in favor of Toyota as to Schara’s punitive damages claim. IT IS SO ORDERED, this 19th day of March, 2013. S/Clay D. Land CLAY D. LAND UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?