CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC. v. ZAYO GROUP LLC

Indiana Southern District Court
Judge:Jane Magnus-Stinson
Referred: Mark J Dinsmore
Case #: 1:21-cv-02859
Nature of Suit240 Real Property - Torts to Land
Cause28:1332 Diversity-Torts to Land
Case Filed:Nov 16, 2021
Last checked: Sunday May 15, 2022 5:45 AM EDT
Defendant
ZAYO GROUP, LLC
Represented By
McKenzie E. Hutchinson
Kightlinger & Gray, Llp (indianapolis)
contact info
Pfenne Peter Cantrell
Kightlinger & Gray, Llp (indianapolis)
contact info
Plaintiff
CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC.
Represented By
Alexander James Pantos
Macgill PC
contact info
Robert D. MacGill
Macgill PC
contact info
Matthew Thomas Ciulla
Macgill PC
contact info

GPO Mar 04 2022
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 19 MOTION to Dismiss filed by ZAYO GROUP, LLC. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mark J. Dinsmore on 3/4/2022.(SWM)
GPO Jun 03 2022
ORDER - For the foregoing reasons, the Court: GRANTS CSX Transportation's Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint, 74; OVERRULES Zayo Group's Objection to Magistrate Judge Dinsmore's Report and Recommendation, 63; ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Dinsmore's Report and Recommendation, 57; and DENIES Zayo Group's Motion to Dismiss, 19. The Clerk is DIRECTED to docket CSX Transportation's Second Amended Complaint, [Filing No. 74-1], as a separate docket entry. The Court requests that the Magistrate Judge continue to regularly conduct status conferences as he has been (SEE ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION). Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 6/3/2022.(DWH)
GPO Aug 10 2022
ORDER - In order for the Court to determine whether it has diversity jurisdiction over the Third-Party Complaint, Zayo and Crossroads are ORDERED to conduct whatever investigation is necessary and file a joint jurisdictional statement by August 31, 2022, properly setting forth each party's citizenship and whether the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs. If agreement cannot be reached on the contents of a joint jurisdictional statement, competing statements must be filed by that date. (See Order.) Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 8/10/2022.(JSR)
GPO Aug 17 2022
ORDER granting in part and denying in part Plaintiff's 135 Motion to Compel. See Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mark J. Dinsmore on 8/17/2022. (SWM)
GPO Aug 24 2023
ORDER ON MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER TO PROHIBIT 30(b)(6) TOPIC - The Court DENIES Zayo's motion for a protective order, [Dkt. 399]. Plaintiff shall file any motion for attorney's fees related to this motion on or before September 11, 2023. (See Order.) Signed by Magistrate Judge Mark J. Dinsmore on 8/24/2023. (CW)
GPO Aug 24 2023
ORDER -The Court GRANTS Baseline's Motion to Dismiss, 286, and Zayo Group's claims against Baseline are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for improper venue. All other claims shall remain pending, and no partial final judgment will enter at this time. SEE ORDER. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 8/24/2023. (KAA)
GPO Aug 24 2023
ORDER denying Defendant Zayo's 400 Motion for Protective Order ORDER TO PREVENT DEPOSITION OF CFO - The Court DENIES Zayo's motion for a protective order regarding deposition of its CFO, Mr. Noto, [Dkt. 400]. Plaintiff shall file any motion for attorney's fees related to this motion on or before September 11, 2023. See Order for additional information. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mark J. Dinsmore on 8/24/2023. (SWM)
GPO Oct 05 2023
ORDER ON MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND - This motion is before the Court on Defendant's Motion for Leave to Amend Amended Answer to a Third Amended Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial. [Dkt. 438.] For the reasons set forth below, the motion is DENIED. (See Order.) Signed by Magistrate Judge Mark J. Dinsmore on 10/5/2023. (CW)
GPO Feb 21 2024
ORDER - Affirmative defenses that Zayo did not raise in its Answers - either generally or specifically - and that prejudice CSX must be stricken. Based on the foregoing, the Court: DENIES AS MOOT CSX's Motion to Strike, 409, as to Additional Affirmative Defense 2; DENIES CSX's Motion to Strike, 409, as to Additional Affirmative Defenses 4 and 6 and the Ejectment Defense; and GRANTS CSX's Motion to Strike, 409, as to Additional Affirmative Defenses 7, 8, and 12. Zayo may not assert Additional Affirmative Defenses 7, 8, or 12 in this litigation. (See Order.) Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 2/21/2024. (JSR)
GPO Apr 23 2024
ORDER - For the foregoing reasons, the Court: DENIES Zayo's Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Opposition to Zayo's Motion to Exclude Alex Saar, P.E.'s Expert Testimony, 565; GRANTS CSXT's Motion to Substitute Brief, 573; and GRANTS Zayo's Motion to Exclude Expert Opinions of Alex R. Saar, 548. (SEE ORDER FOR MORE DETAILS.) Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 04/23/2024. (MRI)
GPO Apr 23 2024
ORDER - For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Zayo's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, 417, as set forth above. No partial final judgment shall issue. The Court ORDERS CSXT and Zayo to confer, to attempt to agree regarding which specific sites remain implicated after the Court's rulings, and to file a Joint Report by May 22, 2024 setting forth which sites remain implicated for each remaining claim. The Court REQUESTS that the Magistrate Judge confer with the parties regarding possible resolution of those remaining claims after the parties file their May 22, 2024 Joint Report. (SEE ORDER FOR MORE DETAILS.) Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 04/23/2024. (MRI)
GPO Jun 24 2024
ORDER -- For the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES CSXT's Motion to Modify the Court's Summary Judgment Order to Allow Interlocutory Appeal, 624, and OVERRULES CSXT's Rule 72(a) Objection to Settlement-Conference Orders, 628. (SEE ORDER FOR MORE DETAILS.) Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 06/24/2024. (MRI)
GPO Jul 16 2024
ORDER: Plaintiff CSX Transportation, Inc. ("CSXT") initiated this matter alleging that Defendant Zayo Group, LLC ("Zayo") installed a fiber optic network system that damaged CSXT's property. During the course of the litigation, disputes have arisen regarding the exact locations of Zayo's installations, resulting in various motions and Court orders. The latest such motion is CSXT's Second Motion to Prohibit Repudiation of KMZ Files, [Filing No. 541], which is ripe for the Court's decision. For the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES CSXT's Second Motion to Prohibit Repudiation of KMZ Files. [541.] (SEE ORDER FOR MORE DETAILS.) Signed by Senior District Judge Jane E Magnus-Stinson on 07/16/2024. (MRI) Modified on 7/16/2024 (MRI).
GPO Jul 16 2024
ORDER denying 415 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 418 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 421 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 423 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 426 Motion for Summary Judgment WITHOUT PREJUDICE to re-file them once issues regarding which claims remain for which sites are resolved. (SEE ORDER FOR MORE DETAILS.) Signed by Senior District Judge Jane E Magnus-Stinson on 07/16/2024. (MRI)
GPO Oct 16 2024
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - The Undersigned RECOMMENDS that the Illinois-based claims in this case be dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction. Obviously, any third-party claims based solely on the Illinois-based claims should be dismissed as well. Any objections to this Report and Recommendation shall be filed with the Clerk in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), and failure to timely file objections within fourteen days after service shall constitute a waiver of subsequent review absent a showing of good cause for such failure. SEE REPORT. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mark J. Dinsmore on 10/16/2024.(JRB)
GPO Nov 15 2024
ORDER Dismissing Claims for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction - Accordingly, the Court reconsiders the prior decision on personal jurisdiction and concludes that it lacks personal jurisdiction over the Illinois-based claims in this case. The Court OVERRULES CSXT's objections to Magistrate Judge Dinsmore's Report and Recommendation, (ECF No. 735); ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Dinsmore's Report and Recommendation, (ECF No. 733); and GRANTS IN PART Zayo's Motion to Dismiss, (ECF No. 19), DISMISSING for lack of personal jurisdiction CSXT's claims arising from alleged conduct taken on CSXT's property located in Illinois. Any third-party claims based solely on the Illinois-based claims are likewise DISMISSED for lack of personal jurisdiction (SEE ORDER FOR DETAILS). Signed by Judge James R. Sweeney II on 11/15/2024. (DWH)
GPO Jan 22 2025
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 637 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction filed by ZAYO GROUP, LLC - For all of the reasons set forth above, the Undersigned RECOMMENDS that Defendant Zayo Group, LLC's Partial Motion to Dismiss Count VI and Count IV Under Rule 12(B) (1), [Dkt. 637], be GRANTED in its entirety. Any objections to this Report and Recommendation shall be filed with the Clerk in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), and failure to timely file objections within fourteen days after service shall constitute a waiver of subsequent review absent a showing of good cause for such failure. (SEE ORDER.) Signed by Magistrate Judge Mark J. Dinsmore on 1/22/25.(NAD)
GPO Jan 22 2025
se for such failure. (SEE ORDER.) Signed by Magistrate Judge Mark J. Dinsmore on 1/22/25.(NAD)REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - The Court designated the Undersigned to issue a report and recommendation "that sets forth as to each disputed site whether [Plaintiff's] claims as to such site were resolved against [Plaintiff] by the Court's summary judgment ruling." [Dkt. 644 at 1-2.] Accordingly, the motion to strike, [Dkt. 717], is DENIED AS MOOT as to the evidence relevant to the "mixed sites" issue. The status of many of the sites in this case following the summary judgment ruling has been a moving target, and it certainly would have been better for all involved if the parties had done the work necessary to examine the evidence of record and agree upon which claims remained for trial in response to Judge Magnus-Stinson's initial order to do so. In the end, after substantial briefing, a hearing, and the dismissal of the Illinois claims, the parties were able to reach agreement based on the evidence of record. Thus, if the Undersigned's Report and Recommendation granting Defendant's partial motion to dismiss is adopted in its entirety, those claims listed in Part VI above will be the claims to be decided at the trial of this case. Any objections to this Report and Recommendation shall be filed with the Clerk in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), and failure to timely file objections within fourteen days after service shall constitute a waiver of subsequent review absent a showing of good cau
GPO Feb 21 2025
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 750 Report and Recommendations, 751 Report and Recommendations. CSXT has moved for leave to file a reply brief in support of its objections to the R & R, (ECF No. 766). The Court grants the motion and notes that it has considered the reply in the foregoing analysis. The Court overrules CSXT's objections to the R & R. The Court adopts both R & Rs, (ECF No. 750, ECF No. 751), in whole. Count VI, in whole, and Count IV, as to the sites CSXT owns in easement, are dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. (See Order.). Signed by Judge James R. Sweeney II on 02/21/2025.(SNB)

Docket last updated: 11/16/2021 11:40 AM EST
Tuesday, November 16, 2021
1 1 37 pgs COMPLAINT against ZAYO GROUP LLC, filed by CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC.. (Filing fee $402, receipt number AINSDC-6842691)(MacGill, Robert)
Related: [-]
Att: 1 Civil Cover Sheet,
Att: 2 Proposed Summons
2 2 NOTICE of Appearance by Robert D. MacGill on behalf of Plaintiff CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC.. (MacGill, Robert)
Related: [-]
3 3 NOTICE of Appearance by Matthew Thomas Ciulla on behalf of Plaintiff CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC.. (Ciulla, Matthew)
Related: [-]
4 4 Corporate Disclosure Statement by CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC. identifying Corporate Parent CSX CORPORATION for CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC... (MacGill, Robert)
Related: [-]