Cunningham v. Ford Motor Company

E.D. Michigan

Cunningham v. Ford Motor Company

DecidedJune 15, 2022

Docket4:21-cv-10781

StatusUnknown

This text of Cunningham v. Ford Motor Company (Cunningham v. Ford Motor Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Michigan primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cunningham v. Ford Motor Company, (E.D. Mich. 2022).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION WILLIAM CUNNINGHAM, et al.,

Plaintiffs, Case No. 21-cv-10781 Hon. Matthew F. Leitman v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY,

Defendant. __________________________________________________________________/ ORDER (1) DIRECTING PARTIES TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFS AND (2) AMENDING SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING SCHEDULE

On June 15, 2022, the Court held a hearing on Defendant Ford Motor Company’s motion to compel arbitration. (See Mot., ECF No. 29.) At the conclusion of the hearing, the Court directed Plaintiffs to file supplemental briefs of no more than five pages. The Court has reviewed the record again and will allow Plaintiffs to file a supplemental brief of up to ten pages addressing (1) the new cases identified by Ford on the record during the hearing (i.e., Lyman v. Ford Motor Co., 2022 WL 856393 (E.D. Mich. Mar. 22, 2022) and Straub v. Ford Motor Co., 2021 WL 5085830 (E.D. Mich. Nov. 2, 2021)) and (2) Ford’s argument that under Swiger v. Rosette, 989 F.3d 501 (6th Cir. 2021), and the other cases cited in Ford’s briefs that the question of whether Ford may invoke the arbitration provision at issue here is a question to be decided in the first instance by the arbitrator. Ford may file a response, of no more than ten pages, to Plaintiffs’ supplemental brief.

In light of the Court expanding the scope of the supplemental briefs, it will provide the parties additional time to file those briefs. Plaintiffs shall file their supplemental brief by no later than June 29, 2022, and Ford shall file its response

to that brief by no later than July 13, 2022. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Matthew F. Leitman MATTHEW F. LEITMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: June 15, 2022

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties and/or counsel of record on June 15, 2022, by electronic means and/or ordinary mail.

s/Holly A. Ryan Case Manager (313) 234-5126

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION WILLIAM CUNNINGHAM, et al.,

Plaintiffs, Case No. 21-cv-10781 Hon. Matthew F. Leitman v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY,

Defendant. __________________________________________________________________/ ORDER (1) DIRECTING PARTIES TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFS AND (2) AMENDING SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING SCHEDULE

On June 15, 2022, the Court held a hearing on Defendant Ford Motor Company’s motion to compel arbitration. (See Mot., ECF No. 29.) At the conclusion of the hearing, the Court directed Plaintiffs to file supplemental briefs of no more than five pages. The Court has reviewed the record again and will allow Plaintiffs to file a supplemental brief of up to ten pages addressing (1) the new cases identified by Ford on the record during the hearing (i.e., Lyman v. Ford Motor Co., 2022 WL 856393 (E.D. Mich. Mar. 22, 2022) and Straub v. Ford Motor Co., 2021 WL 5085830 (E.D. Mich. Nov. 2, 2021)) and (2) Ford’s argument that under Swiger v. Rosette, 989 F.3d 501 (6th Cir. 2021), and the other cases cited in Ford’s briefs that the question of whether Ford may invoke the arbitration provision at issue here is a question to be decided in the first instance by the arbitrator. Ford may file a response, of no more than ten pages, to Plaintiffs’ supplemental brief.

In light of the Court expanding the scope of the supplemental briefs, it will provide the parties additional time to file those briefs. Plaintiffs shall file their supplemental brief by no later than June 29, 2022, and Ford shall file its response

to that brief by no later than July 13, 2022. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Matthew F. Leitman MATTHEW F. LEITMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: June 15, 2022

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties and/or counsel of record on June 15, 2022, by electronic means and/or ordinary mail.

s/Holly A. Ryan Case Manager (313) 234-5126

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Cunningham v. Ford Motor Company, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cunningham-v-ford-motor-company-mied-2022.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack