United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
In re Flint Water Cases. This Relates To ALL CASES
ORDER REGARDING MATTERS DISCUSSED AT THE DECEMBER 10,
2019 STATUS CONFERENCE, GRANTING VNA DEFENDANTS' MOTION
TO DISMISS , AND DENYING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO AMEND
THE COMPLAINT 
E. LEVY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Court held a status conference regarding its pending Flint
water litigation on December 10, 2019. The Court now orders
re Flint Water Cases Discovery
the status conference, several Defendants raised concerns
with the current allocation of time during certain
depositions. As an interim measure, the Court allotted one
additional hour during depositions to both Plaintiffs and
Defendants. Parties must meet and confer to propose a
new procedure to allocate deposition timing in instances
where parties think they need more time than is currently
allocated. If the parties reach an impasse, the party
requesting more time must file a motion by December 23, 2019.
Responses will be due on December 30, 2019, and this Court
will issue a decision before January 6, 2020.
Court will hold a discovery telephone conference call on
Wednesday, December 18, 2019 at 2:00pm. To request that a
discovery issue be added to the agenda, parties must follow
the discovery dispute protocol outlined in the Second Amended
Case Management Order. (ECF No. 998,
Individual Flint Water Cases
Court will issue an order to show cause in all individual
Flint Water Cases as to why certain Defendants should not be
dismissed. These Defendants are: Jeff Wright,
Daniel Wyant,  Dayne Walling, Nick Lyon,  Edward Kurtz,
Liane Shekter Smith,  Nancy Peeler,  Robert Scott,  and Eden
Wells. Agreeing to dismiss certain Defendants
will not waive Plaintiffs' right to appeal this
Court's earlier decisions as to that Defendant.
Plaintiffs in these cases will have until January 8, 2020 to
respond to the order to show cause. Defendants may file a
reply, if needed, no later than January 29, 2020.
Motions to Dismiss in Alexander v. Flint and
Chapman v. Snyder
Court heard oral argument on the pending motions to dismiss
in Chapman v. Snyder (No. 18-cv-10679, ECF No. 49,
50, 51) and Alexander v. Flint. (No. 16-cv-13421,
ECF No. 150.) Plaintiffs' counsel in Chapman did
not appear at this status conference. However, the Court was
informed by Defendants' counsel that the parties reached
an agreement on their pending motions to dismiss, and so the
parties are instructed to file any necessary documents by
Friday, December 13, 2019. Any additional motions to dismiss
in this case must be filed by January 10, 2020.
Alexander, the Court heard argument on both VNA
Defendants' motion to dismiss (No. 16-cv-13421, ECF No.
150) and Alexander Plaintiffs' motion to amend
their complaint. (No. 16-cv-13421, ECF No. 156.) For the
reasons set forth on the record, VNA Defendants' motion
to dismiss is granted. As for Plaintiffs' motion to amend
their complaint, it was improperly filed without a proposed
amended pleading as required by Local Rule 15.1. Regardless,
Plaintiffs' motion to amend is denied. At the hearing,
Plaintiffs' counsel stated that he did not know whether
an amendment would fix the deficiency identified by VNA
Defendants in their motion to dismiss. Furthermore, the same
fraud and reliance issue was addressed in Carthan
where the Court indicated that its ruling “does not
foreclose a fraud claim against Veolia by other plaintiffs.
However, those plaintiffs must plead the necessary
elements of their fraud claim with particularity, including
their reliance on Veolia's allegedly fraudulent
statements.” Carthan v. Snyder, 329 F.Supp.3d
369, 420 (E.D. Mich. 2018) (emphasis in the original).
Despite this warning, Plaintiffs amended their complaint on
November 6, 2018 (No. 16-cv-13421, ECF No. 122), and did not
include allegations showing that any of the Plaintiffs
actually relied on statements made by VNA Defendants. For
these reasons as well as those set forth on the record,
Plaintiffs' motion is denied.
November 2019 status conference, the Court appointed a
committee of lawyers to develop a proposal for the second
bellwether pool selection process. The committee requested
and the Court granted extra time to prepare this proposal.
The new deadline is January 15, 2020, and no further
extensions will be granted.
Scheduling of Next ...