Islanders win another round in PUD lawsuit
CBC Crescent Bar Chronicle News
CRESCENT BAR - The residents of Crescent Bar Island won another round Monday in their legal struggle with the Grant County Public Utility District over use of lands they've occupied for 50 years.
The PUD's motion of March 29 to compel binding arbitration - taking the case out of federal court - was denied by Justin L. Quackenbush, Senior U.S. District Judge for the Eastern District of Washington.
The gist of the judge's 20-page order was that the PUD asked for arbitration too late. Through their attorneys, the islanders argued that point, saying the PUD should have asked for arbitration early in the lawsuit.
The islanders - the plaintiffs in the suit - argued that the matter should stay in Quackenbush's court. Quackenbush agreed.
"Experienced trial lawyers, as are involved in this case, know how important it is to settle on a forum at the earliest possible opportunity," he said in his summary.
Quackenbush found that all three requirements for waiver of the arbitration clause in Crescent Bar leases were met: Defendants knew of their existing right to arbitration, acted inconsistently with that right, and prejudiced plaintiffs by inconsistent actions.
"The court has determined that Defendants have waived their right to compel arbitration," Quackenbush said.
Quackenbush noted the motion to compel arbitration was not filed by the PUD until March 29, more than 14 months after the lawsuit was started by the islanders.
By the time of the filing of the motion, he said, the parties and the court had spent extensive time on pleadings, events, discovery, motions, hearings, and rulings by the court.
The motion was the 267th entry on the docket sheet of the case.
"In earlier decades and stages of this ongoing controversy, (the 1970s through the 2000s) the Defendants, especially the PUD, might have had an incentive to adopt a "wait and see" attitude," Quackenbush said. "But to have extended this approach well into litigation, after rulings by the court, is powerful evidence of the parties' election to waive arbitration."
Quackenbush added: "Plaintiffs have strategized and made choices based on proceeding with this case in federal court. They have compiled over a year's worth of time and expenses that would not have been necessary had they known their claims would proceed to arbitration. Defendants' delay has allowed Plaintiffs to undergo the types of litigation expenses arbitration was designed to alleviate."
Become a Subscriber!
You have read all of your free articles this month. Select a plan below to start your subscription today.
Already a subscriber? Login
