Opinion
Civil Action No. 03-1355.
July 19, 2006
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Before the Court is an objection (Record Document 305) filed by Plaintiffs Rap-A-Lot Records, Suave House, Inc., Warren Cotton d/b/a Ceiba Enterprises, and Par-La Records, L.L.C. (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Plaintiffs") to Magistrate Judge Hayes' March 29, 2006 Ruling and Order, which granted, with modifications, Plaintiffs' motion for leave to file complaint of newly joined plaintiffs. This Court will treat Plaintiffs' "objection" as a magistrate appeal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(a). Endurance Specialty Insurance, Ltd. ("Endurance") and Admiral Insurance Company ("Admiral") oppose the magistrate appeal. See Record Documents 311 312. For the reasons that follow, Plaintiffs' magistrate appeal is overruled and Magistrate Judge Hayes' Ruling and Order of March 29, 2006 is affirmed.
The decision by a magistrate judge as to discovery issues is a non-dispositive matter. This action is not listed in Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1)(A) as one of the dispositive motions (often referred to as the "excepted motions") that a magistrate judge may not conclusively decide. Therefore, Magistrate Judge Hayes' Ruling and Order is not a recommendation to the district court, which normally requires de novo review under Rule 72. Rather, it is an order on a non-dispositive matter that requires the district court to uphold the ruling unless it is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A); see also Castillo v. Frank, 70 F.3d 382, 385 (5th Cir. 1995).
This Court granted summary judgment in favor of both Admiral and Endurance on March 23, 2006 and noted that copyright infringement claim was not the type of section 1983 claim cognizable under the insurance policies. See Record Documents 295 296. Thus, the Magistrate Judge's ruling that Plaintiffs could not "use their complaint [of newly joined plaintiffs] to bring new claims against the defendants [Admiral and Endurance] who have already prevailed on summary judgment or to re-litigate the court's prior rulings in connection therewith; a complaint may not be used as a tool to circumvent a court's prior rulings" was not only appropriate in light of this Court's previous summary judgment rulings, but also legally sound under controlling Fifth Circuit jurisprudence. See Schiller v. Physicians Resource Group, Inc., 342 F.3d 563, 566 (5th Cir. 2003) (listing considerations for granting leave to amend under Rule 15). In the brief supporting their magistrate appeal, Plaintiffs have done nothing more than once again attempt to relitigate the issues on insurance coverage that were settled by this Court in its ruling on the motions for summary judgment filed by Admiral and Endurance. Plaintiffs have not demonstrated how Magistrate Judge Hayes' Ruling and Order was clearly erroneous or contrary to law.
Therefore, the Court finds that the Magistrate Judge's Ruling and Order granting the Motion for Leave to File Complaint of Newly Joined Plaintiffs (Record Document 267) to the extent that Plaintiffs' amended complaint did not circumvent this Court's prior rulings on Admiral's and Endurance's motions for summary judgment; her decision that the amended complaint in no way applied to Admiral and Endurance; and her decision to strike allegation number 18 of the proposed pleading were neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that the magistrate appeal (Record Document 305) filed by Plaintiffs Rap-A-Lot Records, Suave House, Inc., Warren Cotton d/b/a Ceiba Enterprises, and Par-La Records, L.L.C. be and is hereby OVERRULED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Hayes' Ruling and Order of March 29, 2006 (Record Document 297) is AFFIRMED.
THUS DONE AND SIGNED.