Dairl Johnson Claudine Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc.

Caution
92 Daily Journal DAR 12666·975 F.2d 604·1992 WL 220247·23 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 621·1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 21172
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 14, 199290-15975California2,930 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fernandez, J.

Dairl Johnson appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to amend his complaint. The court found that Johnson failed to demonstrate circumstances that would permit joining an additional party after the joinder cut-off date, and granted summary judgment in favor of Mammoth Recreations. We affirm.

BACKGROUND

The underlying facts are straightforward. On December 23, 1987 Johnson was enjoying a day of recreational skiing at the Mammoth Mountain ski resort in Mono County, California. Johnson alleges that he was injured when a “T-bar [ski] lift ... suddenly released” and threw him to the ground.

He filed a diversity action against the ski lift manufacturer, Dopplemayr Ski Lift Company, Ltd., and Mammoth Recreations, Inc. Mammoth Recreations is a holding company which owns a majority of the stock of Mammoth Mountain Ski Area, Inc., the entity which actually owns and operates the ski resort. The complaint did not name Mammoth Mountain Ski Area, Inc. as a defendant despite the fact that it alleged that the ski resort had been negligently operated and maintained.

In its answer, Mammoth Recreations “de-nie[d] each and every ..: allegation” of this paragraph. Apparently, Johnson…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.