SLEP-TONE ENTERTAINMENT CORP. v. The Basket Case Pub Inc. et al

Filing 18

ORDER denying 15 the Plaintiff's Amended Motion for Substitution of Party. See Written Order. Entered by Magistrate Judge Jonathan E. Hawley on 4/15/2015. (KZ, ilcd)

E-FILED

Wednesday, 15 April, 2015 02:51:08 PM
Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD

IN THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
PEORIA DIVISION
SLEP-TONE ENTERTAINMENT
CORPORATION,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 1:15-cv-01009-JBM-JEH

v.
THE BASKET CASE PUB, INC., an
Illinois Corporation, and
DANNETTE RUMSEY,
Defendants.
Order

Now before the Court is the Plaintiff’s, Slep-Tone Entertainment
Corporation’s, Amended Motion for Substitution of Party (Doc. 15). This matter
is fully briefed and for the reasons stated below, the Motion is DENIED.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(c) provides that, “If an interest is
transferred, the action may be continued by or against the original party unless
the court, on motion, orders the transferee to be substituted in the action or
joined with the original party . . . .” The Defendants’ Response in Opposition
convinces the Court that it would not serve the interests of judicial economy or
otherwise facilitate the conduct of litigation if the Court were to allow the
outright substitution of Phoenix Entertainment Partners, LLC for Slep-Tone at
this time. Instead, the Court finds that joinder of Phoenix is the appropriate
action to be taken at this time. See Otis Clapp & Son, Inc v Filmore Vitamin Co, 754
F2d 738, 743 (7th Cir 1985), quoting 7A Wright and Miller, Federal Practice and
Procedure § 1958 at 664–65 (discussing FRCP 25(c) and explaining that “[a]n order
of joinder is merely a discretionary determination by the trial court that the
1

transferee’s presence would facilitate the conduct of litigation”); and ISI
International v Borden Ladner Gervais, LLP, 2002 WL 230904, *3 (ND Ill) (collecting
cases to support the conclusion that the two relevant entities had to be joined as
the proper defendants in the action rather than substitute one for the other).
Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s Amended Motion for Substitution of Party
(Doc. 15) is DENIED. However, pursuant to FRCP 25(c), Phoenix Entertainment
Partners, LLC is joined as a Plaintiff in this action. The Plaintiffs are directed to
file an amended complaint within 14 days (April 29, 2015). The Clerk is directed
to add Phoenix Entertainment Partners, LLC as a Plaintiff in this case.
So ordered.
Entered on April 15, 2015.

s/Jonathan E. Hawley
U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2