BROWN v. BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC et al
| MARSHA RUDDELL BROWN |
| BAYERISCHE MOTOREN WERKE AG and BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC |
| 1:2014cv00931 |
| June 6, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Indianapolis Office |
| Debra McVicker Lynch |
| Jane Magnus-Stinson |
| Motor Vehicle Prod. Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Motor Vehicle Product Liability |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
196
ENTRY - This matter is before the Court on Defendant BMW of North America, LLC's ("BMW") Motion in Limine Number 2, [Filing No. 141 at 21-24], which the Court took under advisement at the final pretrial conference, [Filing No. 195 at 7]. This products liability matter involves allegations that BMW distributed a defectively designed Mini Cooper, which resulted in enhanced injuries to Plaintiff Marsha Brown when her Mini Cooper rolled over. BMW's Motion seeks to exclude evidence of post-sale design changes to the Mini Cooper. The Court has considered the parties' filings, [Filing No. 141 at 21-24; Filing No. 193 at 2-4], and heard argument during the final pretrial conference. The Court GRANTS B MW's Motion in Limine Number 2 to the extent set forth in this Order. As Ms. Brown observes, Rule 407 expressly permits the admission of subsequent remedial measures if feasibility is disputed. Moreover, as Rule 407 suggests, such evidence is likely to be substantially more probative under Rule 403 if BMW disputes feasibility. At the final pretrial conference, counsel for BMW acknowledged that, at the time Ms. Brown's Mini Cooper was sold, at least one other manufacturer utilized the safety equipment that Ms. Brown contends should have been included in the Mini Cooper. Thus, it appears that BMW is not disputing feasibility at this time. However, "[u]nder the caselaw the feasibility inquiry encompasses a whole slew o f interrelated components, including not only the question of the possibility of correction as such but also more nuanced considerations such as the 'economy, practicality and effectiveness' of such corrections." Dewick v. Maytag Co rp., 324 F. Supp. 2d 894, 903 (N.D. Ill. 2004). Therefore, should BMW place feasibility, including economic feasibility, in issue at any time, whether by argument, question, or testimony -- either solicited or unsolicited -- Ms. Brown's counsel may ask the Court for relief from this Order. (See Order). Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 9/22/2017. (APD)
|
|
Filing
169
ORDER - On September 29, 2012, Plaintiff Marsha R. Brown was driving her 2007 Mini Cooper on a highway when her vehicle went off the road, rolled into a ditch, and landed on its roof. As a result, Ms. Brown sustained a cervical fracture, which lef t her partially quadriplegic. Ms. Brown filed the underlying cause of action for negligence against Defendant BMW of North America, LLC ("BMW NA"). [Filing No. 42 .] On March 30, 2017, the Court issued an Order granting BMW NA's Mo tion to Exclude All Evidence Related to Human Subject Rollover Demonstrations Conducted by Plaintiff's Counsel and Related Paper. [Filing No. 136 .] Presently pending before the Court is Ms. Brown's Motion to Reconsider the Court's Ruling. [Filing No. 147 .] The motion is now ripe of the Court's consideration. For the reasons set forth in this Order, the Court DENIES Ms. Brown's Motion to Reconsider the Court's Ruling. [Filing No. 147 .] (See Order). Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 8/10/2017. (APD)
|
|
Filing
136
ORDER - For the reasons detailed in this order, the Court GRANTS BMW NA's 120 Motion to Exclude All Evidence Related to Human Subject Rollover Demonstrations Conducted by Plaintiff's Counsel and Related Paper. SEE ORDER. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 3/20/2017. (JRB)
|
|
Filing
97
ORDER granting BMW AG's 65 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and DISMISSES Ms. Brown's claims against BMW AG WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of personal jurisdiction. No partial final judgment shall issue at this time. (See Order). Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 2/4/2016. (MAC)
|
|
Filing
41
ORDER granting BMW AG's 24 Motion to Dismiss. BMW AG is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE (see Order for details). Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 10/31/2014. (SWM)
|
|
Filing
28
ENTRY: Accordingly, the Court requests the Magistrate Judge to hold a conference with the parties to determine the most efficient way for the jurisdictional disagreements to be resolved, whether via briefing, a hearing, or otherwise ***SEE ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION***. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 9/11/2014.(DW)
|
|
Filing
17
ORDER TO FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT: Because Plaintiff still has not properly pled facts to support the existence of this Court's diversity jurisdiction, the Court STRIKES her Amended Complaint, [Filing No. 6], and BMW NA's Answer, [F iling No. 12], and ORDERS Plaintiff to file a Second Amended Complaint by August 25, 2014. Since Plaintiff will need to serve her forthcoming Second Amended Complaint on the Defendants, the Court DENIES AS MOOT the pending motions regarding Plaintiff's alleged failure to properly serve her previous complaints. [Filing No. 13; Filing No. 15.] ***SEE ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION***. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 8/13/2014.(DW)
|
|
Filing
5
ORDER: Plaintiff's Complaint asserts that this Court has diversity jurisdiction over this action. [Filing No. 1, at ECF p. 1.] The Court has an independent obligation to ensure that it p ossesses jurisdiction. See Thomas v. Guardsmark, LLC, 487 F.3d 531, 533 (7th Cir. 2007) (emphasizing that the court has an independent duty to determine whether diversity exists). Plaintiff is ORDERED to file an Amended Complaint that adequately sets forth the citizenship of both defendants by June 23, 2014. The Amended Complaint shall list each member of BMW NA and trace the citizenship of each of its members through however many layers of partners or members there may be, and it must explain what American corporate form BMW Germany most closely resembles and analyze its citizenship according to that form. Defendants should wait until the Amended Complaint is filed to prepare their answer (see Order for additional information). Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 6/10/2014.(SWM)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Indiana Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
