JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. Winget et al

Filing 354

MEMORANDUM and ORDER denying without prejudice 334 Winget's Motion for Reconsideration of 321 Order Regarding Winget's Motion to Compel Discovery on Counts II and III and 342 Chase's Motion for Protective Order Prohibiting Winget from Deposing Richard Babcock, Roy Gallagher, and Larry Nyhan. Signed by District Judge Avern Cohn. (JOwe)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

JP MORGAN CHASE BANK, NA
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 08-13845

LARRY WINGET and the LARRY WINGET
LIVING TRUST,

HON. AVERN COHN

Defendants.
___________________________________/
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE
WINGET’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDER REGARDING WINGET’S
MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY ON COUNTS II AND III (Doc. 334)
AND
CHASE’S MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER PROHIBITING WINGET FROM
DEPOSING RICHARD BABCOCK, ROY GALLAGHER, AND LARRY NYHAN
(Doc. (342)

This is a commercial finance dispute. Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant JPMorgan
Chase Bank, N.A. (Chase) is the Administrative Agent for a group of lenders that
extended credit to Venture Holdings Company, LLC (Venture) under a Credit
Agreement.1 Chase is suing defendants/counter-plaintiffs Larry Winget and the Larry
Winget Living Trust (collectively Winget) to enforce a guaranty and two pledge
agreements entered into by Winget and the Winget Trust in 2002 in which they
guaranteed the obligations of Venture, a company owned and controlled by Winget
and/or the Winget Trust. Chase makes three claims, as follows:

1

Bank One, NA, was the Administrative Agent for the lenders. It merged with JP
Morgan in 2004 to form JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A.

Count I

Enforcement of Guaranty Against the Winget Trust

Count II

Enforcement of Guaranty Against Winget

Count III

Enforcement of Pledge Agreements Against Winget and the Winget
Trust

Winget filed a counterclaim on Count I seeking reformation of the Guaranty as to the
Winget Trust. A bench trial on Count I was held last month. A decision on the
counterclaim is pending.
Before the Court are the following motions:2
Winget’s Motion for Reconsideration of Order Regarding Winget’s Motion to
Compel Discovery on Counts II and III
Chase’s Motion for a Protective Order Prohibiting Winget from Deposing Richard
Babcock, Roy Gallagher, and Larry Nyhan
For the reasons stated on the record on September 19, 2012, the motions are DENIED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 21, 2012

S/Avern Cohn
AVERN COHN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to the attorneys of
record on this date, September 21, 2012, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.
S/Julie Owens
Case Manager, [phone]

2

Also before the Court is Winget’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Count I
Based on Res Judicata (Doc. 345), filed on September 10, 2012. Chase shall file a
response to the motion in the time permitted under the local rules. Peculiarly, Winget’s
motion is only directed to Count I and does not explain why Counts II and III are not
included. As the Court noted, it would seem that if Winget prevailed on his res judicata
defense on Count I, it would carry over to Counts II and III. Liability of Winget and the
Winget Trust in terms of enforcing the Pledge Agreements is one and the same.
2