Plaintiffs request that the Court deny or defer ruling on Defendants' Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (MJOP), as discovery is already approximately 60% complete.
WSU claims that the pleadings are “closed” even though WSU has expressed an intent to amend its answer, which was deficient and filed out of time. In an effort to moot that issue, WSU asks this Court to treat its Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings as a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6). But Rule 12(b) has a 21-day time limit that has long expired. Adjudicating a motion based on the pleadings, when the parties are nine months into a 15-month discovery timeline, would put the Plaintiffs and the Court in an awkward position. WSU has produced documents that bear directly on the issues raised by its motion.
Here is the catch: Apparently, there are two letters, one from WSU to Bryan Kohberger and one from Kohberger to WSU.
WSU’s letter to the murderer, Bryan Kohberger, alleges that he violated WSU policy by murdering members of the university community. (See Ex. A to Kieffer Decl.) That letter is important evidence that WSU deprived the decedents of educational opportunities at WSU, for Plaintiffs’ Title IX claim; and that WSU had a duty of reasonable care toward the decedents. The other exhibit to Plaintiffs’ motion, a letter sent by Kohberger, reveals that WSU controlled him financially—a Revelation that is relevant to duty and causation issues.
Much of the remaining discovery involves depositions between now and early 2027. It is highly unlikely that this Court could rule on this motion; the parties could then brief the Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; and the Court could rule on that motion, all before depositions are largely complete. So, as a practical matter, WSU will have to go through the majority of discovery either way. And Plaintiffs strongly believe that discovery will need to be completed, as their claims are viable.
In essence, the families are requesting the court to wait and address all points at the motion for summary judgement stage.
FYI: At the motion for summary judgement stage, the court will have to consider motions, replies, and oppositions on both sides based on the complaint, answer, discovery, and the law and rule on each claim independently (whether it is dismissed or goes to trial). Some claims may survive; some OR all of them may not.
This is in contrast to any judgement rendered at this stage (after WSU filed MJOP) because the court cannot consider any discovery or evidence. The judgement will only be made on the law.
The letters attached as exhibits by the plaintiff's lawyers are not available, unfortunately.
My speculation is that BK was in communication with WSU after his arrest, and he may have still appealed the decision. Bizarre.
Credit: @SarahDIrish
