Loading...
2007-05-31 Memo in OppSTATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF WRIGHT TENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Case Type: Declaratory Judgment/Breach of Contract T/C Homes, Inc., Court File No. CV-06-4997 Plaintiff and Cross Claimant, vs. Gold Key Development, Inc., Defendant and Third Party Plaintiff, vs. Hedlund Engineering, Third Party Defendant, and City of Albertville, Defendant and Third Party Plaintiff. vs. T/C HOMES, INC. IS MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN RESPONSE TO CITY OF ALBERTVILLE'S MOTION TO AMEND SHORT-ELLIOTT-HENDRICKSON, INCORPORATED Third Party Defendant and Cross Defendant. Gold Key Development, Inc. Plaintiff, V. City of Albertville, Defendant and Third Party Plaintiff, �l SHORT-ELLIOTT-HENDRICKSON, INCORPORATED Third Party Defendant, Court File No. CV-06-2998 STPLWord:103658.1 I The City of Albertville's assertion that it has moved to amend the Scheduling Order based upon Majestic and Legacy's pending motion to intervene must be critically reviewed. First, the City's Motion to Amend the Scheduling Order predated Majestic's and Legacy's intervention. Second, the City's proposed amendment to the scheduling order goes far beyond the limited scope of the amendment suggested by Majestic and Legacy. That is, Majestic's and Legacy's claims exactly mirror those of T/C Homes, Inc. ("T/C") and, therefore, the amount of prejudice and burden associated with the claims of Majestic and Legacy is comparatively minimal. Finally, the Motion to Amend the Scheduling Order is really predicated upon the City's intent to vastly expand its claims and open an entire new round of discovery relating to its new asserted counterclaim. While T/C has no objection to extending discovery to permit additional inquiry into the new claims made by Majestic and Legacy, it does object to vastly expanding discovery and permitting amendment to the City's pleadings at this late stage in the litigation. ' Majestic's and Legacy's proposed intervention benefits judicial economy by permitting global resolution of all issues with all affected parties. In contrast, the City's proposed amendment seeks to add a new theory at the close of discovery, severely prejudicing all parties. Substantial new discovery would be required from the City, its experts, as well as written discovery to analyze the City's new claims. This lies in stark contrast to Majestic's and Legacy's claims which mirror T/C's claims and are not predicated upon any new legal theory or facts. ' T/C incorporates by reference and adopts the arguments made by Gold Key in its May 30, 2007 memorandum in opposition to the City's proposed amendment. STPL-Word:103655.1 2 Accordingly, T/C opposes the City's proposed amendment to its counterclaim and respectfully requests that the Scheduling Order be modified only to permit discovery against Legacy and Majestic as proposed in their Dated: May 31, 2007 By: ep en E. Yoc: 444 Ce treet, Suite St. Paul, MN 55101-2 651-312-6029 ATTORNEYS FOR T , FENLON & VOGT, P.A. 7, INC. STPL-Word:103658.1 3 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY E-MAIL COUNTY OF RAMSEY ) AND U.S. MAIL Deborah S. Murphy, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that on May 31, 2007, she served a true and correct copy of T?C Homes, Inc.'s Memorandum of Law in Response to City of Albertville's Motion to Amend by e-mail and in St. Paul, Minnesota, first class mail, postage prepaid, in an envelope addressed to the following persons: Mr. Jason J. Kuboushek Iverson Reuvers, LLC 9321 Ensign Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55438 F: 952 946 1501 Ms. Cindi S. Matt Johnson, Larson, Peterson & Matt, P.A. 908 Commercial Drive Buffalo, MN 55313 F: 763-682-4465 Subscribed and sworn to before me this 31 May 2007. of y Publi LORI J. LOKEN Ndwy � Me N A C Wnu r 8",i 31i Mr. Robert W. Kettering, Jr. Mr. Anton J. van der Merwe Arthur Chapman 81 South Ninth Street, Suite 500 Minneapolis, MN 55402-3214 F: 612-339-7655 Mr. John A. Markert Coleman, Hull & Van Vliet, PLLP 8500 Normandale Lake Blvd., Suite 2100 Minneapolis, MN 55437 F: 952-841-0041