Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Cobb v. Czekajlo

United States District Court, E.D. Kentucky, Central Division, Lexington

January 5, 2015

STEPHEN A. COBB, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
STANISLAW CZEKAJLO, et al., Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

DANNY C. REEVES, District Judge.

This case involves a traffic accident that occurred on January 31, 2013, on Paris Pike in Fayette County, Kentucky. On that date, Plaintiff Stephen Cobb collided with the rear of a tractor and trailer[1] owned by a Canadian company, Defendant 11776026 Ontario, Inc., and doing business as Presto Transport ("Ontario Inc."). Although Ontario Inc. owned the tractor at the time of the accident, that company had previously leased the vehicle from Defendant Bodkin Leasing Corporation ("Bodkin"). At the end of the lease term in August 2012, the tractor was sold to Ontario Inc.

This matter is pending for consideration of Defendant Bodkin's motion for summary judgment. [Record No. 35] Bodkin argues that the facts relevant to its prior ownership, leasing arrangement and sale of the subject tractor are not disputed. And based on the undisputed facts, Bodkin contends that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law regarding the claims asserted against it by Plaintiffs Stephen and Susan Cobb.

The plaintiffs oppose Bodkin's motion. They assert that several unresolved factual issues preclude summary judgment. More specifically, they dispute ownership of the tractor and, therefore, assert that Bodkin may have had a duty to insure the vehicle at the time of the accident. Further, they contend that Bodkin failed to maintain the tractor in a proper condition which caused the accident giving rise to this civil action.[2] [Record No. 45]

Having considered the parties' arguments, the Court concludes that summary judgment is not premature. The plaintiffs have not demonstrated that further discovery would likely provide any information sufficient to overcome Defendant Bodkin's present motion. In short, there are no genuine issues of material fact to be resolved. Further, Bodkin is entitle to judgment as a matter of law with respect to the claims asserted against it in Counts II and III of the plaintiffs' Complaint.

I.

A. The Plaintiffs' Factual Allegations

The plaintiffs have not sought to amend their pleadings since the filing of the Complaint on January 29, 2014. The following allegations are taken from the Plaintiffs' Complaint filed in the Fayette Circuit Court on that date.

1. This action arises from a motor vehicle collision that occurred on January 31, 2013 in Fayette County, Kentucky.
2. The plaintiff, Stephen A. Cobb (hereinafter "Mr. Cobb"), is and was at all relevant times, a citizen and resident of Nicholas County in the Commonwealth of Kentucky.
3. The plaintiff, Susan (hereinafter "Ms. Cobb"), is and was at all relevant times, a citizen and resident of Nicholas County in the Commonwealth of Kentucky.
4. At all relevant times, Mr. Cobb and Ms. Cobb were and are lawfully married husband and wife.
5. At all relevant times, the defendant, Stanislaw Czekajlo (hereinafter "Czekajlo"), is and was a natural person and citizen of the Province of Ontario.
6. At all relevant times, the defendant, 1176026 Ontario Inc. (hereinafter "Ontario Inc."), is and was a corporation organized pursuant to the law of the Province of Ontario and, upon information and belief, authorized by the United States Department of Transportation to operate commercial vehicles within the Commonwealth of Kentucky.
7. Upon information and belief, Ontario Inc. was doing business as Presto Transport at all relevant times....
9. At all relevant times, the defendant, Bodkin Leasing Corporation (hereinafter "Bodkin"), is and was a corporation organized pursuant to ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.