Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-02131/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-02131-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 350
Nature of Suit: Motor Vehicle Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Auto Negligence

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

James W. Ramey, 

Plaintiff,

vs.

Gordon Trucking, Inc., et al., 

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-06-2131-PHX-PGR

 

 ORDER

On October 24, 2007, the defendants filed a Notice of Non-Parties at Fault

(doc. #44) pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-2506(B), wherein they designated Dr. Bruce

Long and Colonial Surgical Associates, and unidentified staff thereof, and Dr.

Steven Newman and the University of Virginia, UVA-Dept. of Ophthalmology, and

other unidentified staff thereof, as non-parties at fault for causing some or all of

the plaintiff’s injuries. On October 31, 2007, the plaintiff filed a Motion to Amend

Scheduling Order (doc. #49), wherein he seeks a six-month extension of the

deadline for amending his complaint so that he can conduct discovery regarding

the designated non-parties at fault.

Before it can consider the merits of the plaintiff’s motion, the Court must

determine whether the defendants’ designation of non-parties at fault was

properly filed. Ariz.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(5), the rule that implements § 12-2506(B),

Case 2:06-cv-02131-PGR Document 50 Filed 11/01/07 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

- 2 -

generally requires for purposes of this action that a designation of a non-party at

fault by a defendant must be filed no later than 150 days after that defendant filed

its answer in order for the designation to be considered to be timely filed. See,

Wester v. Crown Controls Corp., 974 F.Supp. 1284, 1286-88 (D.Ariz. 1006)

(Court struck designation of non-parties at fault pursuant to Ariz.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(5)

for being untimely filed); Daly v. Royal Ins. Co. of America, 2002 WL 1768887, at

*16-18 (D.Ariz. July 17, 2002) (Same). 

A review of the record establishes that defendant Gordon Trucking, Inc.

filed its answer on August 9, 2006, according to the defendants’ Notice of

Removal, and defendant Ashworth filed his answer on October 13, 2006. Since

the defendants’ designation of non-parties at fault was filed considerably more

than 150 days after their answers were filed, the Court will require the defendants

to show cause in writing why their designation should not be stricken from the

record as being untimely filed. Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that the defendants shall show cause in writing no later

than November 16, 2007 why their Notice of Designation of Non-Parties at Fault

(doc. #44) should not be stricken from the record as being untimely filed pursuant

to Ariz.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(5). The plaintiff shall have ten business days after service

of the defendants’ OSC memorandum in which to file a response, if any, thereto.

No reply by the defendants shall be filed unless the Court directs that a reply be

filed.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff’s Motion to Amend Scheduling

Order (doc. #49) is stayed pending the Court’s resolution of the issue of the

/ / /

/ / /

Case 2:06-cv-02131-PGR Document 50 Filed 11/01/07 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

- 3 -

timeliness of the defendants’ Notice of Designation of Non-Parties at Fault.

DATED this 1st day of November, 2007.

Case 2:06-cv-02131-PGR Document 50 Filed 11/01/07 Page 3 of 3