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)
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?