Black v. Pride Mobility Products Corporation
MINUTE ORDER denying Plaintiff's 40 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and granting Plaintiff's unopposed 42 Motion to Amend Complaint. Authorized by Judge Thomas S. Zilly. (PM)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
PRIDE MOBILITY PRODUCTS
CORPORATION, et al.,
The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable
Thomas S. Zilly, United States District Judge:
Plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, docket no. 40, is
13 DENIED. This Court cannot decide as a matter of law, if Pride branded the product
pursuant to RCW 7.72.040(2) at this time. The affirmative defenses of failure to join a
14 necessary party and apportionment of fault are available to a defendant in the context of
negligence claims under RCW 7.72.030(1). See Hiner v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc.,
15 138 Wn. 2d 248, 978 P.2d 505 (1999). This Court declines to convert this 12(c) motion
into a summary judgment motion because whether plaintiff is a product seller under
16 RCW 7.72.010(1) must await summary judgment.
Plaintiff’s unopposed motion to amend their complaint, docket no. 42, is
The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Minute Order to all counsel of
Dated this 27th day of January, 2017.
William M. McCool
MINUTE ORDER - 1
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?