Whitt v. Papa Murphy's International, LLC

Filing 46

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER - IT IS ORDERED: 1. Third Party Defendant Grasmick Produce Co., Incs Motion for Leave to File Third Party Complaint (Dkt. 44 ) is GRANTED. Grasmick shall immediately file its third-party complaint. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (cjs)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO
WILLIAM WHITT,
Case No. 1:18-cv-00231-BLW
Plaintiff,
v.
PAPA MURPHY’S INTERNATIONAL,
LLC, a Foreign corporation d/b/a PAPA
MURPHY’S TAKE N BAKE,
Defendant.
_________________________________
PAPA MURPHY’S INTERNATIONAL,
LLC, a Foreign corporation d/b/a PAPA
MURPHY’S TAKE N BAKE,
Third Party Plaintiff,
v.
C.H. ROBINSON COMPANY, a
Delaware Corporation; GRASMICK
PRODUCE CO. INC., an Idaho
Corporation; and MOES 1 through
30, inclusive,,
Third Party Defendants.

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER - 1

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND
ORDER

The Court has before it Third Party Defendant Grasmick Produce Co., Inc’s
Motion for Leave to File Third Party Complaint (Dkt. 44). No party has responded to the
motion, and the deadline for responding has passed.
Rule 14 permits third-party complaints. Fed.R.Civ.P. 14(a). The decision whether
to implead a third-party defendant is left to the sound discretion of the trial court.
Southwest Administrators, Inc. v. Rozay's Transfer, 791 F.2d 769, 777 (9th Cir.1986).
The purpose of impleader is to promote judicial efficiency by avoiding separate actions
against third parties who may be liable to defendant for part or all of plaintiff's original
claim. 6 Fed. Prac. & Proc. Civ § 1442 (3d ed.). Impleader also helps avoid inconsistent
outcomes for claims based on the same or similar evidence. Id. The third party “must, by
motion, obtain the court’s leave if it files the third-party complaint more than 14 days
after serving its original answer.” Id. Here, it has been more than 14 days since the
original answer was served.
Impleader is appropriate where a defendant “is attempting to transfer to the thirdparty defendant the liability asserted against him by the original plaintiff.” Stewart v.
American Int'l Oil 7 Gas Co., 845 F.2d 196, 200 (9th Cir.1988). In exercising discretion
whether to grant leave to file a third-party complaint, courts have considered a number of
factors, including: (1) timeliness of the motion; (2) whether impleader would delay or
unduly complicate the trial; and (3) prejudice to the third part. 6 Fed. Prac. & Proc. Civ §
1443 (3d ed.); see M.O. C.H.A. Society, Inc. v. City of Buffalo, 272 F.Supp.2d 217
(W.D.N.Y.2003) (also including, as a consideration, whether the third-party complaint

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER - 2

states a claim on which relief can be granted); Zero Tolerance Entertainment, Inc. v.
Ferguson, 254 F.R.D. 123, 127 (C.D.Cal.2008).
In its proposed Third-Party Complaint, Grasmick alleges that Church Brothers is
liable to Grasmick for all or part of the claim against Grasmick by Papa Murphy’s based
upon causes of action in tort, contract, statute, and equity. Grasmick alleges that it
received the chopped romaine lettuce from Church Brothers in sealed bags, that
Grasmick never opened those sealed bags, and therefore any adulteration of the lettuce
was not caused by Grasmick. Under these circumstances, particularly given the lack of
response to the motion, the Court finds that the motion would not delay or unduly
complicate the trial, and there is no prejudice to any other party. Accordingly, the Court
will grant the motion.
ORDER
IT IS ORDERED:
1. Third Party Defendant Grasmick Produce Co., Inc’s Motion for Leave to
File Third Party Complaint (Dkt. 44) is GRANTED. Grasmick shall
immediately file its third-party complaint.

DATED: December 3, 2018
_________________________
B. Lynn Winmill
Chief U.S. District Court Judge

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER - 3