Free Joint Preliminary Status Report - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:07-cv-00056-EJD

Document 10

Filed 06/18/2007

Page 1 of 7

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) THE UNITED STATES, ) ) ) Defendant. ) ____________________________________)

BASS MANAGEMENT, INC.,

Case No. 07-056C (Chief Judge Damich)

JOINT PRELIMINARY STATUS REPORT Pursuant to Rule 16 and Appendix A of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Ca s" C C )t pre feh Ji Pem nr Sa s eot lm ( F " h a i i t s o t r i i y tu R pr i R , e ts l i n l a t : (A) Does the court have jurisdiction over the action? Yes this Court has jurisdiction over this matter. This is a civil action

Plaintiff:

under the Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1491 and the Contract Dispute Act, 41 U.S.C. § 601-613. Defendant: Defendant does not believe that this Court has jurisdiction to entertain

Counts III, IV, V, VI, and VII of the complaint. At this time, it is not aware of any reason to caeg t C ut j i ii r a i t o er a i cutit cm ln hlneh orsu s co e r n h t re i n on n h o p i . l e ' rd t n g d g e h m n g s e at (B) No. (C) Should trial of liability and damages be bifurcated and, if so, why? Should the case be consolidated with any other case and, if so, why?

Y s T epre d ar aot o t i e r t t m " rs r e t fudi e. h a i i ge bu hw o n r e h e G os e i s on n ts s e tp t e r cp" paragraph 2 of the Lease Agreement. The parties believe that resolving th m ai o " rs e en g f G os n r e t t og l idd cvr adc s m t n fr u m r j g et i po p a e i s h uh i t i oe n r s o os o sm a u m n wl rm t n cp" r me s y o i y d l efficient outcome. The parties agree that Counts III, IV, V, VI, and VII are subsidiary to the

JO.99361948.1

Case 1:07-cv-00056-EJD

Document 10

Filed 06/18/2007

Page 2 of 7

breach of contract claims arising out of the meani o " rs r e t" T u,h pre n f G os e i s g c p . hs t a i e ts believe that deferring consideration of those claims at this time offers the potential for a quicker resolution of the entire matter. Similarly, determination of damages, if any, should involve a straight forward calculation, which the parties believe may be resolved by agreement or written submission. (D) Should further proceedings in the case be deferred pending consideration of

another case before this court or any other tribunal and, if so, why? No. (E) In cases other than tax refund actions, will a remand or suspension be sought

and, if so, why and for how long? No. (F) No. (G) Does either party intend to file a motion pursuant to RCFC 12(b), 12(c), or Will additional parties be joined?

56 and, if so, what is the schedule for the intended filing? Following the completion of limited discovery concerning the interpretation of the " rs r e t poio o t L ae gem n t pre i ed o i c s m t n fr G ose i s rv i fh es A r et h a i n n t fe r s o oso cp" sn e e , e ts t l o i summary judgment regarding the corr tn rr ao o "rs r e t"D pni o t e i e e t n f gose i s eed g nh c t p ti cp. n e outcome of the central contract issue, either or both parties may file a RCFC 12(b), 12(c) or 56 motion in connection with the deferred claims. The parties believe, however, that resolving the " rs r e ti us a ao t pre t r o eh r a i i us y gem ni lu G ose i "s e m y l w h a i o e l t e i n s e b ar etn i cp s l e ts s v e m n g s e e of further discovery or motions practice.

2
JO.99361948.1

Case 1:07-cv-00056-EJD

Document 10

Filed 06/18/2007

Page 3 of 7

(H)

What are the relevant and factual and legal issues?

The parties have agreed to defer consideration of several counts in the complaint. Accordingly, relevant factual and legal issues identified here do not include issues involving the deferred claims. 1. Wht rt t m " rs r e t a df e i pr r h 2 o t L ae ee h e h e r G os e i s s e nd n a ga cp" i a p f h es e

Agreement should be construed as including receipts of sub-lessees and licensees received by the plaintiff or, in the alternative, should be construed as including the gross income of sub-lessees. 2. T e ln fblvsht r eats eno e w e e t " rs R ci s h p i i eee t a e vn i u i l s ht rh G os ee t a tf i a l s vv h e p"

definition in the lease agreement is ambiguous. The defendant asserts that the plaintiff has not aee i i cm lno t t cn at g fcrhth t m " rs r e t ia b uu. lgd nt o p i ro h ot cn of e t t e G ose i s s m i os l s at e r i i a e r cp" g 3. Whether by conduct, operation, and practice in connection with the Lease

Agreement, the parties intended for the plaintiff to include receipts of sub-lessees received by the p i i i i r ot f ocs oa e r e t t t aec,h A m C rs f ni e ln f n t e ro cnes ni ' e i s o h gny t r y op o E g er a tf s p i rs c p e e n s ( op" ad a u t n fet " rs) n cl li o r . C , c ao n 4. Plaintiff believes the following issues, which will form the basis for its

forthcoming motion to amend the complaint, will be presented by proposed alternative relief, if allowed: 4(a) As alternative relief, wht r h " rs r e t poio sol b e e t G os e i s rv i hu e h e cp" sn d

reformed to require Bass to include receipts of sub-lessees received by it in its report of cnes ni 'r e tt t C rs n i cl li o r t ocs oa e e i soh op ad n a u t n fe . i rs c p e c ao n 4(b) " rs r e t . G ose i s cp" Whether there was a mutual mistake by the parties as to the meaning of

3
JO.99361948.1

Case 1:07-cv-00056-EJD

Document 10

Filed 06/18/2007

Page 4 of 7

4(c)

If no u am s k iet lhd w e e B s uit am s k a t m t l iaes s b se, ht r as n a r iae so u t ai h ' le l t

t m ai o " rs r e t w sesnb , i ot asf lad asd y h C rs o h en g f G ose i s a r oal wt u B s a tn cue b t op s e n cp" a e h 'u e as to require reformation. 4(d) Whether the C rs interpretation since 2003 o t " rs r e t op' f h G os e i s e cp"

provision rendered the Lease Agreement commercially impractical. 4(e) If the Lease Agreement is reformed, whether Bass is entitled to restitution

for excess rent paid since 2003 and interest. Defendant believes that the issues presented in 4(a)-(e) above are not relevant because the Court does not have jurisdiction to reform the contract. (I) What is the likelihood of settlement? Is alternative dispute resolution

contemplated? Settlement does not appear likely at this time; however, the parties will continue to explore settlement options as discovery proceeds and is completed. Similarly, as discovery proceeds the parties may be amenable to alternative dispute resolution. The parties believe that r o t n fs e r a d o h " rsr e t poio m y aite el et y e l i o i use t t t G ose i s rv i a f la ste n b s uo s le e cp" sn cit tm agreement and/or mediation of the remaining issues. (J) Do the parties anticipate proceeding to trial? Does either party, or do the

parties jointly, request expedited trial scheduling and, if so, why? A t si et pre d ntn c a poed gor l S b ct t C ut th t , e a i o o ati t rcei t ta uj toh ors i m h ts ip e n i. e e ' direction, the parties presently believe that the resolution of the contract provision can be decided upon cross motions for summary judgment. If this matter cannot be resolved upon dispositive m t n cne i t cn atrv i , i wlb ncs r cne i t " rs o os ocr n h ot cpoio ta i e ees y ocr n h G os i ng e r s n rl l a ng e r e t poio. n h eeth m tr e t poed o r l n h " rs r e t e i s rv i I t vn t s aew r o rce t tao t G ose i s cp" sn e i t e i e cp" issue, the parties agree that deferring consideration of the remaining counts would be

4
JO.99361948.1

Case 1:07-cv-00056-EJD

Document 10

Filed 06/18/2007

Page 5 of 7

appropriate. (K) No. (L) Is there other information of which the court should be aware at this time? Are there special issues regarding electronic case management needs?

Yes. Plaintiff will file a motion to amend the Complaint in order to add, as an alternative relief, a Count seeking reformation and restitution. Defendant will oppose this motion. Defendant does not believe that this court has jurisdiction to reform the contract. The parties believe limited d cvr o i us e t t t " rs r e t poio i oe n s e r a d o h G os e i s rv i s y s le e cp" sn will expedite resolution of the entire dispute. Consequently, the parties jointly request this Court to permit limited discovery and accept briefing on those issues while deferring discovery and consideration of the remaining issues. (M) What is the proposed discovery plan? July 18, 2007 September 15, 2007 March 17, 2008

Exchange of Initial Disclosures Pa tf Pooe Coe f at i oe ln fs rpsd l o FcDs vr i i' s c y D f dn s rpsd l e f at i oey e nat Pooe Co o FcDs vr e ' s c

Pa tf Pooe D al eo Cos t n fr u m r Jdm n ln fs rpsd ed n fr rsMo oso S m a ug et i i' i i y November 30, 2007 D f dn s rpsd ed n fr rs Mo oso S m a Jdm n e nat Pooe D al eo Cos t n fr u m r ug et e ' i i y April 17, 2008 Pa tf Pooe D al eo R sosso rsMotions ln fs rpsd ed n fr epne t Cos i i' i January 15, 2008

D f dn s rpsd ed n fr epne t Cos t n May 19, 2008 e nat Pooe D al eo R sosso rsMo os e ' i i

5
JO.99361948.1

Case 1:07-cv-00056-EJD

Document 10

Filed 06/18/2007

Page 6 of 7

Respectfully submitted, /s/ Frank W. Trapp Frank W. Trapp, MB #8261 Phelps Dunbar LLP 11 at ai l t e· u e 1 E sC p oSr t S i 600 t e t Jackson, Mississippi 39201-2122 P. O. Box 23066 Jackson, Mississippi 39225-3066 Telephone: (601) 352-2300 Facsimile: (601_360-9777 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF

Respectfully submitted, PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General JEANNE E. DAVIDSON Director /s Kathryn A. Bleecker KATHRYN A. BLEECKER Assistant Director s/ David M. Hibey DAVID M. HIBEY Trial Attorney Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division Department of Justice 1100 L Street, N.W. Attn: Classification Unit 8th Floor Washington, D.C. 20530 Tel: (202) 307-0163 Fax: (202) 514-8624

June 18, 2007

Attorneys for Defendant

6
JO.99361948.1

Case 1:07-cv-00056-EJD

Document 10

Filed 06/18/2007

Page 7 of 7

CERTIFICATE OF FILING I hereby certify that on this 18th day of June, 2007, a copy of the foregoing Joint Pem nr Sa s eotw sid l t n ay I understand that notice of this filing will be r i i y tu R pr a fe e c oi l . l a t " l er cl sn t a pre b oe t no t C ut e c oi fi ss m Pre m yacs t s eto l a i y pr i fh ors l t n in yt . a i a cesh l ts ao e ' e r c lg e ts i fi t og t C ut ss m in h uh h ors yt . lg r e ' e

/s/ Frank W. Trapp Frank W. Trapp

7
JO.99361948.1