Buy This Entire Record For
Mint Solar LLC v. Savage
United States District Court, D. Utah
June 17, 2019
MINT SOLAR, LLC, a Utah limited liability company, and KNIGHT WEST CONSTRUCTION, INC., a Utah corporation, Plaintiffs,
BART SAVAGE, an individual, AARON HALDERMAN, an individual, OLIVIA BLACK, an indivdual, PRIZM ENERGY LLC, a Utah limited liability company, PRIZM ENTERPRISES, LLC, a Utah limited liabilty company, PRIZM HOME LLC, a Utah limited liability company, and DOES 1-10, Defendants. BART J. SAVAGE, an individual, AARON HALDERMAN, an individual, OLIVIA BLACK, an individual, PRIZM ENERGY, LLC a Utah limited liability company, Cross-Complainants,
SCOTT SHUMWAY, an individual; SPENCER SHUMWAY, an individual; SIMON KEOGH, an individual; COLTON CHESTNUT, an individual; BYRON SMITH, an individual; BLAINE THATCHER, an individual; BRENDAN HAYS, an individual; TOMAS REYES, an individual; KNIGHT WEST CONSTRUCTION, INC., a Utah corporation; MINT ENERGY, LLC, a Utah limited liability company; and MNT HOLDINGS, INC., nominally, and ROES 1-100. Cross-Defendants.
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER ON PENDING
STEWART, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
matter is before the Court on a Motion for Entry of Default
and Dismissal filed by Plaintiffs, Counterclaim Defendants,
and Third-Party Defendants (collectively,
“Plaintiffs”). Also before the Court is a Written
Statement and Request for Case Dismissal submitted by
Defendant Bart Savage. For the reasons discussed below, the Court
will deny Plaintiffs' Motion and Defendant's request
Mint Solar, LLC (“Mint”) and Knight West
Construction, Inc. (“Knight”) initially filed
this action in state court against Defendants Bart Savage,
Aaron Halderman, Olivia Black, Prizm Enterprises, LLC and
Prizm Home LLC (collectively, “Defendants”).
Defendants removed this action to this Court on July 17,
2018. On July 24, 2018, Defendants filed a Cross-Complaint.
September 10, 2018, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss,
seeking dismissal of all of Plaintiffs' claims. The Court
denied that motion on November 13, 2018.
the motion to dismiss was denied, the parties agreed to
multiple extensions for Defendants to file their answer.
However, no answer has ever been filed.
April 9, 2019, Defendants' counsel sought to withdraw. On
April 15, 2019, the Court granted counsel's motion. As
part of the Court's order, the Court directed Defendants
to file a notice of substitution of counsel or a notice of
appearance within twenty-one days. Defendants were further
advised that the entity Defendants must be represented by an
attorney. Defendants were warned that failure to comply could
result in sanctions, including dismissal or default.
failed to comply with this order. While Defendant Olivia
Black sought and received an extension of time to file a
notice of appearance or notice of substitution of counsel,
the extended time for her to do so has expired. Thus, no
Defendant has complied with the Court's order, though
Defendant Savage has filed an untimely answer.
bring their Motion seeking default pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P.
55 and dismissal based on Defendants' failure to comply
with the Court's order. The Court agrees with much of
what is contained in Plaintiffs' Motion and could
justifiably enter default against Defendants and dismiss
their counterclaims and third-party claims. However, given
the history of this case and the pro se status of Defendants,
the Court will afford Defendants one last opportunity to come
into compliance with the Court's orders and participate
in this litigation. Therefore, the Court will allow
Defendants an additional fourteen (14) days from the date of
this Order to file a notice of substitution of counsel or a
notice of appearance. Defendants are again notified that they
may not represent the entity Defendants pro se. Rather, those
Defendants must be represented by an attorney who is admitted
to practice law in this Court. Moreover, Defendants may not
represent any other Defendant and may not attempt to file
documents on their behalf. Additionally, Defendants must each
file an Answer within fourteen (14) days of this Order.
Failure to comply with these requirements will result in
sanctions, up to and including default and dismissal.
before the Court is a Written Statement and Request for Case
Dismissal filed by Defendant Savage. Defendant essentially
asks the Court to dismiss this case. However, he provides no
basis for doing so. To the extent that he is seeking
dismissal of Defendants' counterclaim and third-party
claims, his request fails to satisfy the requirements of
Fed.R.Civ.P. 41. As a result, his request must be denied.
that Plaintiffs' Motion for Entry of Default and
Dismissal (Docket No. 48) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. It is
that Bart Savage's Written Statement and Request for Case
Dismissal (Docket No. 52) is DENIED.
are ordered to comply with the terms of this Order within
fourteen (14) days. Failure to do so will result in