MW BUILDERS, INC. v. U.S.

No. 13-1023.

MW BUILDERS, INC. f/n/a MW BUILDERS OF TEXAS, INC., Plaintiff, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant.

United States Court of Federal Claims.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 28 U.S.C. § 1491
Cause: 28 U.S.C. § 1491 Tucker Act
Nature of Suit: 100 Contract - Construction (CDA)
Source: PACER


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

MW BUILDERS, INC., Plaintiff, represented by Paul Harvey Sanderford , Sanderford and Carroll, P.C..

USA, Defendant, represented by Alexander Orlando Canizares , United States Department of Justice.


ORDER

SUSAN G. BRADEN, Chief Judge.

This Order resolves the Plaintiff's August 17, 2016 Motion To Enter Additional Evidence, and Plaintiff's August 26, 2016 Motion To Enter Exhibits 679, 680 and 681.

On April 5, 2016, the court issued a Scheduling Order that stated: "No further exhibits may be added to Plaintiff's exhibit list after April 1, 2016, except by agreement of the parties or by leave of the court." ECF No. 59 at 1.

On May 2, 2016, Plaintiff filed a Fourth Amended Exhibit List that included three new exhibits that were not previously listed: PX 679, PX 680, and PX 681. ECF No. 94. On that same day, the Government filed a Response To Plaintiff's Supplemental Exhibit List, arguing that PX 679, PX 680, and PX 681, should be excluded from evidence, because they violated the court's April 5, 2016 Scheduling Order. ECF No. 95.

The trial took place between May 4, 2016 and May 10, 2016 in Austin, Texas. TR at 1-1329. On the first day of trial, i.e., May 4, 2016, the court admitted Plaintiff's Fourth Amended Exhibit List into evidence, subject to the Government's objections to: PX 679, PX 680, and PX 681, on which the court reserved ruling. TR 6-8. On the last day of trial, i.e., May 10, 2016, the court left the record open and requested that Plaintiff's expert, Neil Miltonberger, provide the court with a Supplemental Report regarding Bergelectric Corp.'s pass-through labor inefficiency and damages claims. TR at 1282-83, 1314.

On August 17, 2016, Plaintiff filed a Motion To Enter Additional Evidence ("8/17/16 Mot."), seeking to admit Neil Miltonberger's supplemental report into evidence. ECF No. 114. On August 26, 2016, Plaintiff filed a Motion To Enter Exhibits 679, 680, and 681 ("8/26/16 Mot."). ECF No. 118. On September 2, 2016, the Government filed a Response to Plaintiff's August 26, 2016 Motion ("Govt. Resp.") (ECF No. 120) and an Opposition to Plaintiff's August 17, 2016 Motion ("Govt. Opp.") (ECF No. 121). In the alternative, if the court grants Plaintiff's August 17, 2016 Motion, the Government requests that the court also grant it leave to file the rebuttal report of its expert, Stephen Weathers. Gov't Opp. at 3. On September 9, 2016, Plaintiff filed a Reply

In Support Of The August 17, 2016 Motion ("Pl. Reply"). ECF No. 122. The court has discretion to close and reopen the trial record, and may do so sua sponte. See Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine, 401 U.S. 321, 331 (1971) ("Like a motion to under Rule 15(a) to amend the pleadings, a motion to reopen to submit additional proof is addressed to [the court's] sound discretion."); see also Lussier v. Runyon, 50 F.3d 1103, 1113 (1st Cir. 1995) ("This rule pertains even when the district court opts to reopen the record on its own initiative.").

At the end of trial, the court left the record open and requested a Supplemental Report from Mr. Miltonberger. TR at 1282-83, 1314. Accordingly, the court grants Plaintiff's August 17, 2016 Motion to admit Mr. Miltonberger's Supplemental Report into evidence. Likewise, the court grants the Government leave to file its expert Mr. Weathers' rebuttal report into evidence.

In addition, Plaintiff requests that the court admit three additional exhibits into evidence: PX 679, PX 680, and PX 681.8/26/16 Mot. at 1. Plaintiff asserts that these exhibits were identified late, because of the Government's voluminous document production after discovery ended. 8/26/16 Mot. at 4. Although the court took note of the Government's objection to these late exhibits on the first day of trial, TR at 7-8, the Government subsequently failed to show that it would be prejudiced by their inclusion in the record. Accordingly, the court also grants Plaintiff's August 26, 2016 Motion.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases