Minn. R. Civ. A pleading is relevant if it is related to the controversy between the parties and if it presents an issue for trial. If a defense does not raise material issues of fact and the matter may be determined as a matter of law, a judgment on the pleadings is appropriate. While Plaintiffs correctly argue that they have the right, within the bounds of the law and good sense, to plead their complaint as they determine is most appropriate, Defendants also have the right to present their answers as they determine are most appropriate. While the Defendants' affirmative defenses related to subrogation may on their face not directly respond to Plaintiffs' allegations of independent and direct harm, such defenses cannot be determined at this time to be irrelevant.
Further discovery is required.
If discovery reveals, for example, that Plaintiffs have no direct cause of action, the case could be converted to one involving issues of subrogation. In such a situation, the Defendants' affirmative defenses would not be irrelevant and would, presumably, have to be reinstated, necessitating additional discovery and causing further delay and additional expense. Plaintiffs' motion is premature and, therefore, is denied. Plaintiffs' Memorandum, pg. Defendants' Memorandum, pg.