Hrones v. Rideout Memorial Hospital

Opinion

1] Glenda Hrones, No. 2:20-cv-00449-KJM-KJIN Plaintiff, ORDER v. Rideout Memorial Hospital DBA Adventist Health and Rideout, et al., Defendants. At the upcoming hearing on February 11, 2022, the parties shall be prepared to discuss in a focused manner this court’s subject matter jurisdiction, including by addressing the authorities cited in this court’s order at ECF No. 38 and the arguments in the supplemental briefs at ECF Nos. 39 and 40. The parties shall also be prepared to discuss whether the hospital 1s judicially estopped from arguing now that this action cannot be adjudicated unless this court interprets a collective bargaining agreement. See generally, e.g., New Hampshire v. Maine, 532 U.S. 742 (2001) (interpreting and applying doctrine of judicial estoppel); Milton H. Greene Archives, Inc. v. Marilyn Monroe LLC, 692 F.3d 983 (9th Cir. 2012) (same). The hospital previously argued it is entitled to summary judgment without interpreting a collective bargaining agreement. See generally Mem., ECF No. 27; Reply, ECF No. 35.

The parties are advised the court does not otherwise intend to hear arguments or ask questions about whether defendant Rideout Memorial Hospital is entitled to summary judgment. DATED: February 3, 2022.