Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 118 Filed 01/12/12 Page 1 of 3                                                            ...
Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 118 Filed 01/12/12 Page 2 of 3have a duty to preserve evidence without the necessity of a ...
Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 118 Filed 01/12/12 Page 3 of 3directed to the current pleadings and shall not incorporate ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Judge Haddon Order

1,093

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,093
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Judge Haddon Order

  1. 1. Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 118 Filed 01/12/12 Page 1 of 3 FILED GREAT r.. , . 2012 JAN 12 ArrJ 10 25 PtlPliK ... ,:j"f"Y ,1.,..0,- t- 11 i ·"1 n ,. , " v J ! BL_ _ _ _. DEPUTY CLERK IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA MISSOULA DIVISION MICHELE REINHART, DAN DONOVAN,~dDEBORAH NETTER, individually ~d on behalf No. CV-II-72-M-SEH of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, ORDER vs. GREG MORTENSON, DAVID OLIVER RELIN, PENGUIN GROUP (USA), INC., a Delaware Corporation, and MC CONSULTING, INC., a Montan~ Corporation, Defend~ts. On August 3, 2011, Plaintiffs moved for preservation of documents. Themotion is opposed. Plaintiffs have not shown that Defend~ts have destroyed, or will destroy,evidence. Moreover, Defend~ts acknowledge they are aware that all litigants -1­
  2. 2. Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 118 Filed 01/12/12 Page 2 of 3have a duty to preserve evidence without the necessity of a court order. No orderdirecting Defendants to preserve documents is warranted, On November 30, 2011, Plaintiffs moved to file Fourth AmendedComplaint,1 which would add RICO claims, redefine the purported class, drop onenamed Plaintiff and add two others, and add one Defendant. The motion isopposed. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2) states that the "court should freely give leave [toamend] when justice requires." A scheduling order in this matter has not beenestablished and no discovery has occurred. Amendment is warranted. ORDERED: I. Plaintiffs Motion to File Fourth Amended Complaint and Motion toDrop and Add Parties2 is GRANTED. 2. Plaintiffs Motion for Preservation ofDocuments 3 is DENIED. 3. All other pending motions4 in this case are DENIED as moot, withoutprejudice to renew, if appropriate. 4. Any renewed motions and supporting briefs and papers shall be 1 Document No. 112-1. 2 Document No. 112, ~ Document No. 42, 4 Document Nos, 40, 47, 49,51,53,56,75, and 116. -2­
  3. 3. Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 118 Filed 01/12/12 Page 3 of 3directed to the current pleadings and shall not incorporate by reference materialsappearing in briefs or papers filed in connection with the motions referenced inparagraph 3 above. ~ DATED this K day of January, 2012. United States District Judge -3­

×