Cummings v. United Healthcare Services, Inc. et al

Filing 74

ORDER Denying Defendants' 55 Motion for Summary Judgment on the Pleadings and Denying Plaintiff's 60 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings.The parties will have 30 days from the date of entry of this order to file dispositive motions. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 3/16/2015. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3

***

4

ANGELA CUMMINGS,

5
6
7
8
9

Plaintiff,
v.
VALLEY HEALTH SYSTEM, LLC, a
Delaware Limited-Liability Company d/b/a
DESERT SPRINGS HOSPITAL;
RAEJOHNE FOSTER, an individual,

12

ORDER ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT AND MOTION FOR
JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
(Dkt. ##55, 60)

Defendants.

10
11

Case No. 2:13-CV-00479-APG-GWF

Defendants moved for summary judgment. (Dkt. #55.) However, when filing their
motion, they had not yet filed an answer to plaintiff’s complaint (despite that the deadline to do so

13
was in April of 2014).
14
15

In lieu of filing a response to the motion for summary judgment, plaintiff moved to strike

16

or stay consideration of defendants’ motion. Among other things, plaintiff argued that she could

17

not properly oppose defendants’ motion without an answer being filed. Defendants admitted they

18

mistakenly failed to file an answer but argue I should ignore this technical defect and rule on their

19

motion for summary judgment as if it were unopposed.

20

Plaintiff, in turn, moved for judgment on the pleadings. (Dkt. #60.) Plaintiff premised its

21
motion on the fact that defendants had not filed an answer and therefore, plaintiff argued,
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

defendants are deemed to have admitted all of plaintiff’s allegations. Subsequently, Magistrate
Judge Foley granted defendants leave to file an answer and granted plaintiff additional discovery.
I now deny both of these motions. While defendants are permitted to file a motion for
summary judgment before they file an answer, their failure to file a timely answer unfairly
prejudiced plaintiff in this case. Plaintiff could not know whether I would grant defendants’

1

motion to file an untimely answer, and whether I allowed an answer to be filed implicated how

2

plaintiff might respond. I therefore deny defendants’ motion for summary judgment without

3

prejudice.

4

I also dismiss plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings. Plaintiff’s motion is

5

premised on there being no answer filed in this case. But in light of Judge Foley’s ruling an

6

answer is now on file. Further, plaintiff’s motion was untimely.1

7
In order to give both parties the opportunity to re-file and respond to dispositive motions, I

8
9

will extend the dispositive motion deadline by 30 days from the date of entry of this order.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Dkt.

10
11

#55) is DENIED without prejudice.

12
13

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings (Dkt.
#60) is DENIED without prejudice.

14

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties will have 30 days from the date of entry of

15
16

this order to file dispositive motions.

17

Dated: March 16, 2015.

18
ANDREW P. GORDON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

Plaintiff filed her motion in October of 2014 and the dispositive motion deadline was August 1,
2014.
2