Financial Resources Network, Inc. et al v. Brown & Brown, Inc. et al

Filing 130

Magistrate Judge Marianne B. Bowler: ORDER entered. PROCEDURAL ORDER RE:DEFENDANTS SECOND RENEWED MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOCKET ENTRY # 119); PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOCKET ENTRY # 115). Defendants are therefore directed to inform this court on or before March 4, 2013, whether they wish to incorporate the facts and the arguments they present to oppose plaintiffs partial summary judgment motion to also support their summary judgment motion.(Feeney, Eileen)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
FINANCIAL RESOURCES NETWORK, INC.,
FINANCIAL FAMILY HOLDINGS LLC,
ROSALIND HERMAN and GREGG D. CAPLITZ,
Plaintiffs,
v.

CIVIL ACTION NO.
09-11315-MBB

BROWN & BROWN, INC., BROWN & BROWN OF
CALIFORNIA, INC., AMERICAN GUARANTEE
AND LIABILITY INSURANCE COMPANY, ZURICH
NORTH AMERICA COMPANY AND CALSURANCE,
Defendants.
PROCEDURAL ORDER RE:
DEFENDANTS’ SECOND RENEWED MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT (DOCKET ENTRY # 119); PLAINTIFFS’
MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
(DOCKET ENTRY # 115)
February 27, 2013
BOWLER, U.S.M.J.
Pending before this court is a summary judgment motion filed
by defendants American Guarantee and Liability Insurance Company,
Zurich North America Company, Brown & Brown, Inc., Brown & Brown
of California, Inc. and Calsurance (“defendants”).
# 119).

(Docket Entry

Plaintiffs Financial Resources Network, Inc., Rosalind

Herman and Gregg D. Caplitz (“plaintiffs”), in turn, seek partial
summary judgment to establish certain facts under Rule 56(g),
Fed. R. Civ. P., and liability under Rule 56(a), Fed. R. Civ. P.
(Docket Entry # 115).
Unlike defendants, plaintiffs incorporate facts and

arguments raised in support of their partial summary judgment
motion to oppose defendants’ summary judgment motion.
Entry # 123).

(Docket

For example, the first page of plaintiffs’

opposition to defendants’ motion states, “[P]laintiffs
incorporate by reference the facts section set forth in
Plaintiffs Memo [Doc. #116] at 4-8.”

(Docket Entry # 123, p. 1).

Defendants, however, do not incorporate arguments and facts
raised in opposing plaintiffs’ partial summary judgment motion to
support defendants’ summary judgment motion.

Principles of

fairness dictate allowing defendants the opportunity to
incorporate such facts and arguments to support their summary
judgment motion.
CONCLUSION
Defendants are therefore directed to inform this court on or
before March 4, 2013, whether they wish to incorporate the facts
and the arguments they present to oppose plaintiffs’ partial
summary judgment motion to also support their summary judgment
motion.

/s/ Marianne B. Bowler
MARIANNE B. BOWLER
United States Magistrate Judge

2