Trell v. McCune et al
ORDER that 12 Defendants' Motion for Leave to Amend Their Answer is granted. FURTHER ORDERED that the hearing set in this matter for August 29, 2017 is vacated. Signed by Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr on 8/21/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
LYNN ELYSE TRELL,
STEPHEN F. MCCUNE, et al.,
Case No. 2:17-cv-01401-RFB-GWF
This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion for Leave to Amend Their Answer
(ECF No. 12), filed on July 21, 2017. Plaintiff filed her Response (ECF No. 14) on August 3, 2017
and Defendants filed their Reply (ECF No. 15) on August 4, 2017. The Court concludes that this
motion may can be decided without oral argument, and therefore vacates the hearing and issues its
decision on the motion.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
Plaintiff was allegedly injured in a motor vehicle accident on July 31, 2015 when her
automobile was struck from the rear by a Semi Freightliner Tractor owned by Defendant Swift
Transportation Co., LLC and operated by Defendant Stephen F. McCune. See Petition for
Removal (ECF No. 1), Exhibit A (“Complaint”), ¶¶ 6-9. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant McCune
was acting in the course and scope of his employment by Swift at the time of the collision. Id. at ¶
8. In its initial answer, filed on June 16, 2017, Defendants admitted that Defendant McCune was an
employee of Swift and was within the course and scope of his employment at the time of the
accident. Answer (ECF No. 6), ¶¶ 5, 8. Defendants now wish to amend their answer to state in
answer to paragraph 8 of the complaint:
Defendants admit that at the time of the July 31, 2015 motor vehicle
accident [Mr.] McCune was an independent contractor under
exclusive lease to Swift Transportation Co. of Arizona, LLC. The
remaining allegations contained in this paragraph are denied.
Motion to Amend (ECF No. 12), Exhibit A, Proposed Amended Answer.
Defendant also seek to amend their answer to paragraph 16 of the complaint to state:
Defendants admit that Mr. McCune breached a duty of care by
striking plaintiff’s vehicle on the roadway. Because Mr. McCune was
an independent contractor under exclusive lease to Swift
Transportation Co. of Arizona, LLC, it is liable to the same extent as
Mr. McCune. The remaining allegations contained in this paragraph
Plaintiff does not oppose this proposed amendment to Defendants’ answer, but wants it to be
subject to the condition “that the liability stipulation may not be used by the parties to limit
discovery that the parties would otherwise be entitled to conduct in this action.” Response (ECF
No. 14), pgs. 2-3.
The Court declines to adopt the requested condition. Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 26(b)
states that parties may obtain discovery regarding any nonprivileged matter that is relevant to any
party’s claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case. It is not clear what particular
concern Plaintiff has regarding how discovery may be affected by the proposed amendment. Such
concerns, however, should be resolved in accordance with Rule 26(b) and in light of how particular
discovery requests relate to the claims and defenses in this action. Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Leave to Amend Their Answer
(ECF No. 12) is granted.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the hearing set in this matter for August 29, 2017 is
DATED this 21st day of August. 2017.
GEORGE FOLEY, JR.
United States Magistrate Judge
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?