Pettit v. Brunswick Corporation et al.,

Filing 18

ORDER Granting 16 Motion for Leave to Amend Answer to Assert Third Party Complaint. FURTHER ORDERED that, on or before January 11, 2013, defendant must sign and file the proposed Amended Answer (#16 Exhibit A) with the court. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach on 12/27/12. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
4

DISTRICT OF NEVADA
5

***
6
7
8

CRAIG PETTIT,

2:12-cv-01255-RCJ-VCF

9

Plaintiff,

ORDER

10

vs.
11

BRUNSWICK CORPORATION,

(Motion For Leave to Amend Answer to Assert

12

Defendant.

Third Party Complaint #16)

13

Before the court is defendant Brunswick Corporation’s Motion For Leave to Amend Answer to
14

Assert Third Party Complaint. (#16). Plaintiff Craig Pettit filed a Non-Opposition. (#17).
15

A.

Background

16

Defendant removed the action to this court on July 16, 2012, based on diversity of citizenship
17

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. (#4). Plaintiff’s complaint asserts claims for (1) strict products liability,
18

(2) negligence, (3) breach of express and implied warranties, and (4) alter ego liability against
19

defendants Brunswick and Sea Ray of Knoxville, LLC relating to an incident where a ladder attached to
20

a boat manufactured by defendant Brunswick injured plaintiff’s finger. (#4 Exhibit A). On July 30,
21

2012, defendant filed its answer to the complaint, asserting twenty-four affirmative defenses. (#9). The
22

parties filed a proposed discovery plan and scheduling order on August 29, 2012 (#12), which the court
23

signed on August 31, 2012 (#13). The parties filed a stipulation for dismissal of defendant Sea Ray of
24

Knoxville, LLC (#14), and the court signed the same on October 9, 2012 (#15). Defendant Brunswick
25

filed the instant motion to amend on December 3, 2012. (#16).

1
2

B.

Motion to Amend Answer

3

Defendant asks this court for leave to file an amended answer to assert a third-party complaint
4

against GG Schmitt & Sons, Inc. for contribution and indemnity. (#16). Pursuant to Local Rule 15-1,
5

defendant attached as Exhibit “A” its proposed amended answer. (#16-1 Exhibit A). Defendant asserts
6

that it is the manufacturer of subject boat, but that it “did not design or manufacture the subject boat
7

ladder.” (#16). Defendant argues that the “interests of justice warrant leave to file the attached
8

amended [a]nswer because Brunswick has learned that GG Schmitt & Sons, Inc is the entity that
9

supplied the boat ladder that is alleged to have caused [p]laintiff’s injuries, if any.” Id. Plaintiff does
10

not oppose defendant’s motion to file an amended answer (#16). (#17).
11

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a), “[a] party may amend its pleading once as a
12

matter of course within...21 days after serving it,” and “[i]n all other cases, a party may amend its
13

pleading only with the opposing party's written consent or the court's leave.” “The court should freely
14

give leave when justice so requires.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). The court finds it in the interest of justice
15

to permit defendant to file the proposed amended answer (#16 Exhibit A), as defendant recently
16

discovered that GG Schmitt & Sons, Inc. was the manufacturer of the alleged faulty ladder and plaintiff
17

does not oppose the motion (#17). Id.
18

Accordingly and for good cause shown,
19

IT IS ORDERED that defendant Brunswick Corporation’s Motion For Leave to Amend Answer
20

to Assert Third Party Complaint (#16) is GRANTED.
21

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, on or before January 11, 2013, defendant must sign and file
22

the proposed Amended Answer (#16 Exhibit A) with the court.
23

DATED this 27th day of December, 2012.
24

_________________________
CAM FERENBACH
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

25

2