Congratulations to Kelsey Shewbert of HWS Law Group on her recent success on defeating plaintiff’s motion to vacate a partial summary judgment order pursuant to CR 54(b). In this matter, plaintiff filed a UIM claim against defendant, seeking damages relating to three surgeries with alleged medical specials exceeding $200,000. In addition, plaintiff alleged that he could no longer work in any capacity due to the accident. Near the close of discovery, defendant filed a motion for partial summary judgment regarding plaintiff’s alleged economic and non-economic damages, arguing that plaintiff could not meet his burden of proof that the accident proximately caused the alleged injuries and damages. In April 2022, the Court granted defendant’s motion, finding that plaintiff did not meet his burden of proof regarding the vast majority of medical treatment and limited recovery to approximately six months of chiropractic treatment, two weeks of wage loss, and noneconomic damages for approximately six months.

Two years later, in April 2024, plaintiff filed a motion under CR 54(b), arguing that the order on partial summary judgment should be vacated because genuine issues of material fact existed regarding plaintiff’s injuries and damages. In support of the motion, plaintiff presented evidence which was available at the time of the original motion for partial summary judgment that plaintiff did not submit in opposition to the same. Plaintiff provide no rationale for his failure to submit the information in 2022 but argued that justice favors resolving the case on the merits. On June 21, 2024, after briefing and oral argument, the Court denied plaintiff’s motion to vacate, ruling that CR 54(b) should not be interpreted to permit a party who lost a motion for summary judgment to re-argue the same issue at any time before the judgment is entered, unless there is a change in circumstances, facts, or law.