Steward v. CMRE Financial Services, Inc.

Filing 54

ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 48 defendants' motion for summary judgment is DENIED without prejudice to the filing of a new motion for summary judgment, attaching all referenced exhibits by February 3, 2017. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 1/27/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)

Download PDF
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 4 Hilary Steward, 5 Plaintiff 2:15-cv-00408-JAD-NJK 6 v. 7 CMRE Financial Services, Inc. et al., Order Denying without Prejudice Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 48] 8 Defendants 9 10 Hilary Steward brings this class-action Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) action 11 against CMRE Financial Services, Inc. and Healthcare Revenue Management Group (“HRMG”), 12 who left her two voicemails to collect on a third party’s hospital bill. Defendants move for summary 13 judgment, arguing that the FDCPA does not apply because HRMG is not a debt collector attempting 14 to collect a debt, and Steward is not a consumer with standing to bring suit. Though defendants cite 15 various exhibits in their summary-judgment motion, no exhibits were attached. 16 The bulk of Steward’s six-page response argues that defendants failed to carry their initial 17 burden of production because they attached no evidence to support their assertions, including that the 18 account in question was not in default at the time it was assigned to HRMG.1 On the heels of 19 Steward’s response pointing out these deficiencies, defendants filed an “errata” to their summary- 20 judgment motion, attaching the missing exhibits cited in their motion. Defendants’ belated proffer 21 deprived Steward of a fair opportunity to meaningfully address their arguments and supporting 22 evidence. 23 The court’s strong preference is to decide cases on their merits. Defendants’ out-of-order 24 filing frustrates that goal. In the interest of justice, I exercise my inherent power to manage the 25 docket and essentially order a do-over of the parties’ summary-judgment briefing. I therefore deny 26 without prejudice defendants’ summary-judgment motion and give them until February 3, 2017, to 27 28 1 See ECF No. 51. Page 1 of 2 1 file a rule-compliant motion with all exhibits attached and properly authenticated. The briefing 2 schedule in LR 7-2 will then apply. 3 4 Conclusion Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendants’ motion for summary judgment 5 [ECF No. 48] is DENIED without prejudice to the filing of a new motion for summary judgment, 6 attaching all referenced exhibits by February 3, 2017. 2017. 0 7 8 _________________________________ ______________________ __ _ _ _ _ _ Jennifer A. Dorsey nifer Dorsey r United States District Judge ted States tate tes Judge ud 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Page 2 of 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?