Free Order on Motion for Partial Summary Judgment - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:04-cv-01099-JLK-DW

Document 141

Filed 01/06/2006

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 04-cv-1099-JLK (DLW) WOLF CREEK SKI CORPORATION, INC., Plaintiff, v. LEAVELL-McCOMBS JOINT VENTURE, d/b/a VILLAGE AT WOLF CREEK, Defendant. ________________________________________________________________________ ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE RECOMMENDATION ON WOLF CREEK' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON S BREACH OF CONTRACT COUNTERCLAIMS (DOC. 117) ________________________________________________________________________ KANE, J. This matter is before me on the Wolf Creek Ski Corporation' Objection to certain s portions of the Magistrate Judge' December 1, 2005, Recommendation on Motion for s Summary Judgment, Docket No. 117 in this case. The portions of the Recommendation at issue in the Objection are those concerning the Magistrate' conclusions that (1) Wolf s Creek' request for summary judgment on Defendant' counterclaims for breach of s s contract and breach of implied duty of good faith and fair dealing should be denied on grounds that disputed issues of fact preclude summary judgment, and (2) that disputed issues of fact preclude summary judgment on Wolf Creek' statute of limitations defense s to those claims as well. My review under Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), is de novo as to the portions of the Recommendation to which specific written objection is made, and I may

Case 1:04-cv-01099-JLK-DW

Document 141

Filed 01/06/2006

Page 2 of 3

accept, reject, or modify the Recommendation under that standard. Having carefully reviewed Magistrate Judge West' Recommendation, Wolf s Creek' Objection to the Recommendation and Defendant' Response, as well as the s s lengthy underlying briefs for and against summary judgment and supplements thereto, and being familiar with the facts and law at issue, I OVERRULE Wolf Creek' Objection s and ADOPT the December 1, 2005 Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as an Order of this Court. The Magistrate Judge made his detailed and well reasoned Recommendation after hearing oral argument on the Motion for Summary Judgment and being intimately familiar with the history and proceedings in this hotly disputed litigation. The Recommendation contains extensive citations to record evidence and specifically finds that disputed issues of material fact exist regarding whether the SUA was breached and, if it was breached, when that cause of action accrued for purposes of triggering the running of the statute of limitations period. The Magistrate Judge properly construed and applied the operative law. I agree Wolf Creek' Objection construes Defendant' breach of s s contract counterclaims too narrowly in its attempt to force them outside the statute of limitations period, and applying the appropriate standards for summary judgment, the Magistrate Judge properly determined disputed facts precluded the adoption of Wolf Creek' construction as a matter of law. s Accordingly, Wolf Creek' Objection (Doc. 125) is OVERRULED, and the s December 1, 2005 Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge denying Wolf Creek' s
2

Case 1:04-cv-01099-JLK-DW

Document 141

Filed 01/06/2006

Page 3 of 3

Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 117) is ADOPTED as an ORDER of the Court. Dated this 6th day of January, 2006. BY THE COURT:

s/John L. Kane
SENIOR U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

3