Fleming et al v. Parnell et al

Filing 134

ORDER BIFURCATING TRIAL by Judge Benjamin H Settle. (TG)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA 5 6 7 DERRAL FLEMING, and MAG 8 ENTERPRISES, LLC, Plaintiffs, 9 ORDER BIFURCATING TRIAL v. 10 11 CASE NO. C13-5062 BHS SCOTT PARNELL and SAMSON SPORTS, LLC, 12 Defendants. 13 14 This matter comes before the Court on the parties’ joint statement regarding 15 bifurcation (Dkt. 129). 16 On April 18, 2014, the Court denied the parties’ cross-motions for summary 17 judgment and requested a joint statement on the issue of bifurcating the upcoming trial. 18 Dkt. 126. On April 25, 2014, the parties responded. Dkt. 129. Defendants request that 19 the Court bifurcate the federal issues from the state issues and proceed to trial on the 20 federal issues first. Id. at 9–14. Although Plaintiffs agree that the federal issues should 21 be bifurcated from the state issues, they argue that the Court should proceed to trial on 22 the state issues first. Id. at 2–4. ORDER - 1 1 Plaintiffs present six arguments in support of their position. Id. at 2–8. These 2 arguments are without merit and are in direct contrast to Plaintiffs’ filing in this case. For 3 example, Plaintiffs argue that “if Defendants have no authority – lack standing – to bring 4 the claims they assert, then there are no Federal claims to try.” Dkt. 129 at 5. Plaintiffs’ 5 complaint, however, sets forth three claims establishing federal question jurisdiction. See 6 Dkt. 1. Moreover, if the state law claims should be tried first, then the parties should stay 7 this action and lift the stay in the state court. 8 Therefore, the Court hereby BIFURCATES this matter and the parties will 9 proceed to trial on the federal claims only. 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. 11 Dated this 29th day of April, 2014. A 12 13 BENJAMIN H. SETTLE United States District Judge 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ORDER - 2

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?