Moi v. Chihuly Studio, Inc., C17-0853RSL. (2019)
Court: District Court, D. Washington
Number: infdco20191011l55
Visitors: 6
Filed: Oct. 07, 2019
Latest Update: Oct. 07, 2019
Summary: ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR RETURN OF DOCUMENTS ROBERT S. LASNIK , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on the "Chihuly Defendants' Motion for Order re Dale Chihuly's Private Documents Retained by Plaintiff Moi." Dkt. # 186. Defendants essentially seek summary disposition of their conversion counterclaim in which they allege that plaintiff "possesses personal and confidential private documents of Dale's that he continues to hold despite Dale's demand that they be ret
Summary: ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR RETURN OF DOCUMENTS ROBERT S. LASNIK , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on the "Chihuly Defendants' Motion for Order re Dale Chihuly's Private Documents Retained by Plaintiff Moi." Dkt. # 186. Defendants essentially seek summary disposition of their conversion counterclaim in which they allege that plaintiff "possesses personal and confidential private documents of Dale's that he continues to hold despite Dale's demand that they be retu..
More
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR RETURN OF DOCUMENTS
ROBERT S. LASNIK, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court on the "Chihuly Defendants' Motion for Order re Dale Chihuly's Private Documents Retained by Plaintiff Moi." Dkt. # 186. Defendants essentially seek summary disposition of their conversion counterclaim in which they allege that plaintiff "possesses personal and confidential private documents of Dale's that he continues to hold despite Dale's demand that they be returned." Dkt. # 3 at ¶ 6. These assertions have not been proven. In fact, defendants opted to voluntarily dismiss the conversion counterclaim.
Defendants cannot obtain the relief requested simply by filing a motion untethered to any existing claim. The motion will therefore be DENIED. The Court notes, however, that the dismissal is without prejudice. If plaintiff or his agents have wilfully interfered with Mr. Chihuly's right to his property without lawful justification, defendants are free to seek any and Page 2> all appropriate relief in another action.1
FootNotes
1. The Court has reviewed and considered the Declaration of Anne M. Bremner, plaintiff's first counsel in this matter. Dkt. # 192. Now that plaintiff's copyright claims have been dismissed and there is no plausible justification for needing to prove the nature of plaintiff's relationship with Mr. Chihuly, the Court expects that, in keeping with her excellent reputation for integrity and reasonableness, counsel will prevail upon her former client for permission to return any and all copies of the "sensitive documents" that she retains at this juncture.
Source: Leagle
