Both O’Keefe and State Farm began this past week with significant motions in play. On Monday, SLABBED published It’s going to happen, a post on State Farm’s opposition to O’Keefe’s motion requesting reconsideration of the Court’s decision denying the plaintiffs’ request to include State Farm Mutual as a defendant.
Meanwhile, another dispute was taking place off-docket
Simply stated, the number of discovery requests each party would be allowed to serve – a matter the Court decided this past July – or so it thought became a party game to State Farm. A reading of the related briefs and orders indicates it became a game of spin the bottle.
Spin the bottle. Land on the issue driving O’Keefe’s motion to alter and/or amend the findings of the Court’s judgment re: No one knows what goes on behind closed doors:
Plaintiffs respectfully submit that, in light of the facts placed before the Court in support of Plaintiffs’ motion for leave to amend to add State Farm Mutual as a party Defendant…
Spin the bottle. Land on the claim made in State Farm’s opposition linked in the post It’s going to happen:
There is simply no legitimate purpose to add State Farm Mutual to this lawsuit and there is certainly no ground to reconsider the Court’s September 3, 2009 order. (emphasis added)
Spin the bottle. Land somewhere previously not mentioned on SLABBED – National Association of State Farm Agents v State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company: Continue reading “party games – State Farm plays spin the bottle with O’Keefe v State Farm – Magistrate Judge Anderson takes a spin that kisses Mutual and brings it in”