Roberts et al v. C.R. England et al, No. 2:2012cv00302 - Document 100 (D. Utah 2012)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM DECISION and ORDER granting 93 Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brooke C. Wells on 08/31/2012. (tls)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION CHARLES ROBERTS, an individual, and KENNETH MCKAY, an individual, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated,, MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT Plaintiffs, v. C.R. ENGLAND, INC., a Utah corporation; OPPORTUNITY LEASING, INC., a Utah corporation; and HORIZON TRUCK SALES AND LEASING, LLC, a Utah limited liability company,, Defendants. Case No. 2:12-cv-302 TS District Judge Ted Stewart Magistrate Judge Brooke Wells Before the Court is Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint. 1 In response, Defendants state that they do not oppose Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint 2 except for one reservation. Plaintiffs second claim for relief purports to be under the Utah Racketeer Influenced and Criminal Enterprise Act (RICE Act). 3 Defendants note, however, that the RICE Act was replaced in Utah by the Pattern of Unlawful Activity Act (PUAA). 4 Notwithstanding this potential obstacle, Plaintiffs have confirmed to Defendants that they intend to assert their claim under PUAA and have noted that their statutory citations refer to PUAA, which, like the RICE Act, is cited at Utah Code Section 76-10-1601 et seq. 5 1 Docket no. 93. 2 Response p. 2. 3 See Utah Code ยง 76-10-1601 et seq. 4 See id. 5 Response p. 2. Therefore, based upon Plaintiffs confirming that they intend to assert their claim under PUAA, Defendants not opposing Plaintiffs motion and for good cause shown, the Court GRANTS the Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 31 August 2012. Brooke C. Wells United States Magistrate Judge 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
