Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Motions
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Motions
Attorney(S)
Judges

George E. CLUTE, et al., v. The DAVENPORT COMPANY, et al.

BLUMENFELD, District Judge

INTERIM RULING

In the interest of efficient management of judicial business, the court exercises its discretion to defer ruling on plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment as to liability on their securities claim until after the statute of limitations issue is decided. See Burnham Chem. Co. v. Borax Consol., 170 F.2d 569, 572-73 (9th Cir. 1948) (district court procedure that reserved decision on summary judgment motion until resolution of statute of limitations issue was acceptable), cert. denied, 336 U.S. 924, 69 S.Ct. 655, 93 L.Ed. 1086 (1949); United States v. United States Casualty Co., 180 F.Supp. 715, 717 (D.Del. 1960) (court may in its discretion deny motion for summary judgment without prejudice on the ground that factual issues should be addressed first because the decision on those issues might make determination of certain legal issues unnecessary); 6 J. Moore, Moore's Federal Practice ¶ 56.15[6], at 56-613 (1987) (courts have reserved ruling on summary judgment motion until after trial of a separate issue). The statute of limitations issue shall be separated from the other issues in this case for prompt disposition. Cf. Fed.R.Civ.P. 42(b) (bifurcation of trials); Local Rule 10(b) (bifurcation of issues). To expedite the resolution of that issue, a status conference has been scheduled for August 17, 1987, at 10:00 a.m., wherein a scheduling order will be discussed.

SO ORDERED.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

CLUTE v. DAVENPORT COMPANY
(Aug 4, 1987)