Wine Education Council v. Arizona Rangers

• Court: District Court, D. Arizona
• Decided: July 15, 2020
• Docket: 2:19-cv-02235
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

9 Wine Education Council, No. CV-19-02235-PHX-MTL

10 Plaintiff, ORDER

11 v.

12 Arizona Rangers,

13 Defendant. 14 15 Before the Court is Plaintiff Wine Education Council’s Motion Pursuant to 16 Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(d) to Deny or Defer Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment 17 (the “Motion”). (Doc. 107). Defendant Arizona Rangers has filed an early summary 18 judgment motion seeking judgment in its favor on Plaintiff’s claims. (Doc. 98). The 19 Motion for Summary Judgment contends that summary judgment may be entered on all 20 claims based on the American Endowment Foundation donation letters themselves. 21 (See Doc. 98). Plaintiff Wine Education Council (“WEC”) asserts that discovery must be 22 had on the intent of the letters. This includes taking depositions of certain people and 23 obtaining specified categories of documents. 24 Rule 56(d) provides “a device for litigants to avoid summary judgment when they 25 have not had sufficient time to develop affirmative evidence.” United States v. 26 Kitsap Physicians Serv., 314 F.3d 995, 1000 (9th Cir. 2002). In granting or denying a 27 Rule 56(d) motion, the Court has discretion based on the specifics and status of the case. 28 The Court may consider the status of discovery, the nonmovant’s need for facts held only 1 by the movant, and the relationship between the sought-after facts and material issues of 2 the case. See Program Eng’g, Inc. v. Triangle Publ’ns, Inc., 634 F.2d 1188, 1193 3 (9th Cir. 1980) (“Generally where a party has had no previous opportunity to develop 4 evidence and the evidence is crucial to material issues in the case, discovery should be 5 allowed before the trial court rules on a motion for summary judgment.”); Mackey v. 6 Pioneer Nat’l Bank, 867 F.2d 520, 523 (9th Cir. 1989) (“[T]he district court may refuse 7 to grant the party’s application for summary judgment if the opposing party needs time to 8 discovery central facts.”). 9 A party seeking to delay summary judgment for further discovery must state “what 10 other specific evidence it hopes to discover [and] the relevance of that evidence to its 11 claims.” Program Eng’g, Inc., 634 F.2d at 1194. An accurate prediction of what will be 12 revealed through additional discovery may not possible, since “the whole point of 13 discovery is to learn what a party does not know or, without further information, cannot 14 prove.” Stevens v. Corelogic, Inc., 899 F.3d 666, 678 (9th Cir. 2018). The evidence 15 sought by a Rule 56(d) request, however, must be more than pure speculation. See Cal. v. 16 Campbell, 138 F.3d 772, 779–80 (9th Cir. 1998). In particular, the party requesting the 17 Rule 56(d) deferral must: (1) set forth in an affidavit the specific facts sought in further 18 discovery; (2) show that the sought-after facts exist; and (3) show that those facts are 19 essential to adequately oppose summary judgment. See Family Home & Fin. Ctr., Inc. v. 20 Fed. Home Loan Mortg. Corp., 525 F.3d 822, 827 (9th Cir. 2008). 21 The Court finds WEC has satisfied the Rule 56(d) standard. WEC set forth, in 22 affidavit form, the specific facts they hope to elicit from discovery (see Doc. 107-4, 23 ⁋ 8–9); that such facts are discoverable (see id., ⁋ 9, 12); and that the facts are essential to 24 oppose the Arizona Rangers’ motion for summary judgment (see id., ⁋ 14). 25 The discovery period is open until October 2, 2020. (Doc. 94). The Arizona 26 Rangers may refile their Motion for Summary Judgment after WEC completes its 27 requested discovery. 28 / 1 Accordingly, 2 IT IS ORDERED that Wine Education Council’s Rule 56(d) motion seeking 3|| deferment of Arizona Ranger’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 107) is granted. 4 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Arizona Rangers’ Motion for Summary 5 || Judgment (Doc. 98) is denied without prejudice. 6 Dated this 15th day of July, 2020. 7 Wichal T. Hburde Michael T. Liburdi 10 United States District Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

-3-