Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

U.S. Pipelining LLC v. Johnson Controls, Inc.

United States District Court, D. Hawaii

October 31, 2016

U.S. PIPELINING LLC, a foreign limited liability company, Plaintiff,
v.
J HNSON CONTROLS, INC., a foreign corporation; ASSOCIATION OF APARTMENT OWNERS OF KAANAPALI ALII, a Hawaii nonprofit corporation; ALLANA, BUICK & BERS, a foreign corporation; JOHN DOES 1-10; JANE DOES 1-10; DOE PARTNERSHIPS 1-10; DOE CORPORATIONS 1-10; and DOE ENTITIES 1-10, Defendants.

          ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.'S AMENDED MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF NO. 25)

          HELEN GILLMOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         Plaintiff U.S. Pipelining LLC filed a Complaint alleging various contract and tort claims arising out of renovation work it performed at a condominium complex on Maui. One of the Defendants, Johnson Controls, Inc., filed a motion for summary judgment on the basis that Plaintiff was not a licensed contractor pursuant to Hawaii law and is therefore statutorily precluded from recovering in a civil action.

         Johnson Controls, Inc.'s Amended Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 25) is DENIED.

         PROCEDURAL HISTORY

         On March 22, 2016, Plaintiff U.S. Pipelining LLC (“Plaintiff”) filed a Complaint. (ECF No. 1).

         On May 19, 2016, Defendant Johnson Controls, Inc. (“Johnson Controls”) filed DEFENDANT JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF No. 23) and CONCISE STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF No. 24).

         On May 20, 2016, Johnson Controls filed DEFENDANT JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.'S AMENDED MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF No. 25) and AMENDED CONCISE STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF No. 26).

         On May 26, 2016, Johnson Controls filed SECOND AMENDED CONCISE STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. (ECF No. 28).

         On June 2, 2016, Johnson Controls filed NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF DEFENDANT JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT FILED MAY 19, 2016 [CM/ECF 23], CONCISE STATEMENT OF FACTS FILED MAY 19, 2016 [CM/ECF 24], AND AMENDED CONCISE STATEMENT OF FACTS FILED MAY 20, 2016 [CM/ECF 26]. (ECF No. 29).

         On June 6, 2016, Plaintiff filed PLAINTIFF U.S. PIPELINING LLC'S MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF No. 31) and PLAINTIFF U.S. PIPELINING, LLC'S CONCISE STATEMENT OF FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT JOHNSON CONTROL INC.'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF No. 30). A declaration attached to Plaintiff's Concise Statement, entitled “DECLARATION OF JEREMY BOWMAN IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, ” was unsigned. (ECF No. 30-1).

         On June 7, 2016, the Court notified Plaintiff of the unsigned declaration. On the same date, June 7, 2016, Plaintiff filed a second, signed, DECLARATION OF JEREMY BOWMAN IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. (ECF No. 32).

         On June 21, 2016, Johnson Controls filed REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF No. 43) and OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY PLAINTIFF U.S. PIPELINING LLC IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF No. 44). In its Objection, Johnson Controls requested that the Court strike the Second Declaration of Jeremy Bowman (“the Second Declaration”), or, in the alternative, that the Court disregard all changes made by the Second Declaration.

         On June 24, 2016, the Court filed a Minute Order concerning the Second Declaration. The Court cautioned Plaintiff for filing an unsigned declaration and failing to seek leave of Court before submitting an amended declaration. The Court permitted the filing of the Second Declaration, denying Johnson Controls' request to strike the Second Declaration or to disregard modifications made by the Second Declaration. (ECF No. 45).

         On July 24, 2016, Plaintiff submitted a Notice of Previously Uncited Authority via e-mail. (ECF No. 51).

         On July 25, 2016, Johnson Controls filed OBJECTION TO PLAINTIFF'S JULY 24, 2016 LR 7.8 SUBMISSION. (ECF No. 50).

         On the same date, July 25, 2016, the Court held a hearing on Johnson Controls' Amended Motion for Summary Judgment. (ECF No. 51). At the hearing, the Court instructed Plaintiff to file the Notice of Previously Uncited Authority by July 26, 2016. The Court permitted Johnson Controls to file substantive objections to Plaintiff's notice by July 29, 2016. (Id.)

         On July 26, 2016, Plaintiff filed U.S. PIPELINING, LLC'S NOTICE OF ADDITIONAL AUTHORITIES. (ECF No. 52). The filing did not include copies of the authorities cited.

         On July 29, 2016, Johnson Controls filed OBJECTION TO PLAINTIFF'S ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION [CM/ECF 52]. (ECF No. 53).

         On the same date, July 29, 2016, the Court filed a Minute Order instructing Plaintiff to file the additional authorities referenced in the Notice filed on July 26, 2016 by August 1, 2016. The Court allowed Johnson Controls to file substantive objections to Plaintiff's notice by August 2, 2016. (ECF No. 54).

         On August 1, 2016, Plaintiff filed U.S. PIPELINING, LLC'S FILING OF ADDITIONAL AUTHORITIES. (ECF No. 55).

         On August 2, 2016, Johnson Controls filed OBJECTION TO PLAINTIFF'S ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION [CM/ECF 52, 55]. (ECF No. 56).

         BACKGROUND

         The Kaanapali Alii ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.