Brackett, et al v. Abex Corporation, et al

Filing 41

ORDER striking 33 & 36 Motions for Summary Judgment ; granting 34 & 37 Motions to Strike ; denying as moot motions for hearings [34 &37]. Signed by District Judge Martin Reidinger on 8/2/2012. (bsw)

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
SHELBY DIVISION
CIVIL CASE NO. 4:94cv66

RAYMOND ROGER LEDFORD,
Administrator of the Estate of
William Newell Ledford, Deceased,
et al.,
Plaintiffs,
vs.

ABEX CORPORATION, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

THIS MATTER is before the Court on the following motions:
(1)

Pneumo Abex, LLC’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 33];

(2)

Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike Pneumo Abex, LLC’s Motion for
Summary Judgment and Motion for Emergency Hearing
Concerning Same [Doc. 34];

(3)

Honeywell International Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment
[Doc. 36]; and

(4)

Plaintiffs’ Motion to Strike Honeywell International Inc.’s Motion for
Summary Judgment and Motion for Emergency Hearing
Concerning Same [Doc. 37].

On May 19, 2010, the Honorable Eduardo C. Robreno, Presiding Judge
of the asbestos multidistrict litigation docket (“MDL 875”), entered a
Scheduling Order that set several deadlines in this case, including a deadline
for the filing of dispositive motions. See In re: Asbestos Products Liability
Litig., No. 2:09-cv-91859-ER (E.D. Pa. May 19, 2010). Specifically, the MDL
875 Scheduling Order provided that all dispositive motions were to be filed by
December 23, 2010. See id.
In accordance with Judge Robreno’s Scheduling Order, the Defendant
Pneumo Abex, LLC filed a motion for summary judgment based on North
Carolina’s statute of repose on December 23, 2010. [See MDL 875 Docket
Sheet, Doc. 10-1 at 6]. In response to the Defendant’s motion for summary
judgment, the Plaintiffs filed an objection and response. [See id.]. Judge
Robreno denied the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment on February
28, 2011. See In re: Asbestos Products Liability Litig., No. 2:09-cv-91859-ER
(E.D. Pa. Feb. 28, 2011).
On April 11, 2011, the United States Panel on Multidistrict Litigation
entered a Conditional Remand Order which remanded the case to this Court.
[Doc. 10]. This Court held a hearing on April 26, 2012. At that time, the
parties indicated to the Court that the case was generally ready to proceed to

2

trial.

None of the parties indicated a need to file any further dispositive

motions.

Following the April 26, 2012 hearing, the parties submitted a

proposed Consent Scheduling Order for the Court’s consideration. [Doc. 23].
Notably, the parties’ motion does not address the need for the filing of any
further dispositive motions in this matter.

The Court entered a revised

Scheduling Order on May 18, 2012, setting this matter for trial during the
Court’s September 10, 2012 trial term. [Doc. 26]. The revised Scheduling
Order makes no provision for the filing of any further dispositive motions. [Id.].
Thereafter, on July 23, 2012, the Defendant Pneumo Abex, LLC filed the
present Motion for Summary Judgment based upon the Plaintiffs’ alleged lack
of product identification. [Doc. 33]. The Defendant Honeywell International,
Inc. filed a similar motion the following day. [Doc. 36]. The Plaintiffs now
move to strike both of these motions. [Docs. 34, 37].
The Defendants’ motions are untimely. As noted above, the MDL 875
Scheduling Order provided that all dispositive motions were to be filed by
December 23, 2010, and the revised Scheduling Order entered by this Court
upon remand makes no provision for the filing of dispositive motions. The
Defendants have not provided any good cause why these motions should be

3

considered at this late date. Accordingly, the Court will grant the Plaintiffs’
motions to strike the summary judgment motions filed by the Defendants.
Accordingly, IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Plaintiffs’ Motions
to Strike [Docs. 34, 37] are GRANTED, and the Defendants’ Motions for
Summary Judgment [Docs. 33, 36] are hereby STRICKEN.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Plaintiffs’ Motions for an
Emergency Hearing [Docs. 34, 37] are DENIED AS MOOT.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed: August 2, 2012

4