Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

MGM GRAND HOTEL, LLC v. SHIN, 2:16-cv-02347-JAD-NJK. (2017)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20170224i03 Visitors: 5
Filed: Feb. 22, 2017
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2017
Summary: Order Granting Unopposed Motion to Dismiss Punitive Damages Claim in First Amended Complaint [ECF No. 45] JENNIFER A. DORSEY , District Judge . MGM Grand Hotel, LLC brings this suit to recover its losses caused when defendant Kyung Shin used a fraudulently issued bank draft for gaming credit and other benefits. In its amended complaint against Shin and the issuing financial institutions Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce and CIBC Securities, Inc. (collectively, "CIBC"), MGM prays for punit
More

Order Granting Unopposed Motion to Dismiss Punitive Damages Claim in First Amended Complaint

[ECF No. 45]

MGM Grand Hotel, LLC brings this suit to recover its losses caused when defendant Kyung Shin used a fraudulently issued bank draft for gaming credit and other benefits. In its amended complaint against Shin and the issuing financial institutions Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce and CIBC Securities, Inc. (collectively, "CIBC"), MGM prays for punitive damages against all defendants.1 CIBC moves to dismiss this punitive damages "claim"2 against it, arguing that the amended complaint lacks facts to support such an award.3

MGM has not opposed the motion, and the deadline for response passed without any request for an extension.4 Local Rule 7-2(d) states that the "failure of an opposing party to file points and authorities in response to" a motion to dismiss "constitutes a consent to the granting of the motion."5 I invoke LR 7-2(d) and deem MGM's failure to oppose this motion to dismiss as consent to granting the motion; accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that CIBC's Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 45] is GRANTED; MGM's prayer for punitive damages against CIBC and any allegations supporting that prayer are deemed stricken.

FootNotes


1. ECF No. 33.
2. Punitive damages are a remedy, not an independent claim for relief, and MGM has not pled its request for punitive damages as an independent cause of action. See ECF No. 33. Accordingly, I treat this motion to dismiss the "claim" for punitive damages as a request to strike the unsupported prayer for punitive damages under FRCP 12(f).
3. ECF No. 45.
4. Any opposition was due by 2/19/17.
5. Nev. L.R. 7-2(d).
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer