Roberts et al v. C.R. England et al

Filing 100

MEMORANDUM DECISION and ORDER granting 93 Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brooke C. Wells on 08/31/2012. (tls)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION
CHARLES ROBERTS, an individual, and
KENNETH MCKAY, an individual, on behalf
of themselves and others similarly situated,,

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR
LEAVE TO FILE THIRD AMENDED
COMPLAINT

Plaintiffs,
v.
C.R. ENGLAND, INC., a Utah corporation;
OPPORTUNITY LEASING, INC., a Utah
corporation; and HORIZON TRUCK SALES
AND LEASING, LLC, a Utah limited liability
company,,
Defendants.

Case No. 2:12-cv-302 TS

District Judge Ted Stewart

Magistrate Judge Brooke Wells
Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint. 1 In
response, Defendants state that they “do not oppose Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File Third
Amended Complaint” 2 except for one reservation. Plaintiffs’ second claim for relief purports to
be under the Utah Racketeer Influenced and Criminal Enterprise Act (RICE Act). 3 Defendants
note, however, that the RICE Act was replaced in Utah by the Pattern of Unlawful Activity Act
(PUAA). 4 Notwithstanding this potential obstacle, “Plaintiffs have confirmed to Defendants that
they intend to assert their claim under PUAA and have noted that their statutory citations refer to
PUAA, which, like the RICE Act, is cited at Utah Code Section 76-10-1601 et seq.” 5

1

Docket no. 93.

2

Response p. 2.

3

See Utah Code § 76-10-1601 et seq.

4

See id.

5

Response p. 2.

Therefore, based upon Plaintiffs confirming that they intend to assert their claim under
PUAA, Defendants not opposing Plaintiffs’ motion and for good cause shown, the Court
GRANTS the Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 31 August 2012.

Brooke C. Wells
United States Magistrate Judge

2