Trell v. McCune et al

Filing 16

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)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6
7
8
9
10
11

LYNN ELYSE TRELL,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
STEPHEN F. MCCUNE, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
__________________________________________)

Case No. 2:17-cv-01401-RFB-GWF

ORDER

12
13

This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion for Leave to Amend Their Answer

14

(ECF No. 12), filed on July 21, 2017. Plaintiff filed her Response (ECF No. 14) on August 3, 2017

15

and Defendants filed their Reply (ECF No. 15) on August 4, 2017. The Court concludes that this

16

motion may can be decided without oral argument, and therefore vacates the hearing and issues its

17

decision on the motion.

18

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION

19

Plaintiff was allegedly injured in a motor vehicle accident on July 31, 2015 when her

20

automobile was struck from the rear by a Semi Freightliner Tractor owned by Defendant Swift

21

Transportation Co., LLC and operated by Defendant Stephen F. McCune. See Petition for

22

Removal (ECF No. 1), Exhibit A (“Complaint”), ¶¶ 6-9. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant McCune

23

was acting in the course and scope of his employment by Swift at the time of the collision. Id. at ¶

24

8. In its initial answer, filed on June 16, 2017, Defendants admitted that Defendant McCune was an

25

employee of Swift and was within the course and scope of his employment at the time of the

26

accident. Answer (ECF No. 6), ¶¶ 5, 8. Defendants now wish to amend their answer to state in

27

answer to paragraph 8 of the complaint:

28

...

1

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.

2
3

Motion to Amend (ECF No. 12), Exhibit A, Proposed Amended Answer.
4
Defendant also seek to amend their answer to paragraph 16 of the complaint to state:
5
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
are denied.

6
7
8
9

Id.

10
Plaintiff does not oppose this proposed amendment to Defendants’ answer, but wants it to be
11
subject to the condition “that the liability stipulation may not be used by the parties to limit
12
discovery that the parties would otherwise be entitled to conduct in this action.” Response (ECF
13
No. 14), pgs. 2-3.

The Court declines to adopt the requested condition. Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 26(b)

14
states that parties may obtain discovery regarding any nonprivileged matter that is relevant to any
15
party’s claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case. It is not clear what particular
16
concern Plaintiff has regarding how discovery may be affected by the proposed amendment. Such
17
concerns, however, should be resolved in accordance with Rule 26(b) and in light of how particular
18
discovery requests relate to the claims and defenses in this action. Accordingly,
19
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Leave to Amend Their Answer
20
(ECF No. 12) is granted.
21
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the hearing set in this matter for August 29, 2017 is
22
vacated.
23
DATED this 21st day of August. 2017.
24
25
26

______________________________________
GEORGE FOLEY, JR.
United States Magistrate Judge

27
28
2