Hackford et al v. Scarlet Land Services et al

1
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF UTAH
LISA HACKFORD, individually and as
Personal Representative of the Estate of
Todd Killian; AND BRANDON HACKFORD, as
Trustee of the TripleKRanch Trust,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
SCARLET LAND SERVICES, LLC, a Texas
limited liability company; and J. MARCUS
DAVIS,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM DECISION
AND ORDER
Case No. 2:25CV00520 DAK-CMR
Judge Dale A. Kimball
Magistrate Judge Cecilia M. Romero
This matter is before the court on (1) Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Amended
Complaint, (2) Plaintiffs’ Conditional Motion for Leave to Amend, and (3) Defendants’ Motion to
Strike and/or Disregard Extraneous Matters. The court had set the matter for a hearing, but in
reviewing the parties’ briefing on the motions, the court has determined that oral argument
would not materially assist the court in deciding the pending motions. Consequently, the court
has elected to decide the motions on the briefs, and the hearing previously set for December
11, 2025, is vacated.
In their Motion to Dismiss, Defendants seek to dismiss all claims brought by Plaintiffs.
First, they seek to dismiss the claims brought by Lisa Hackford in both her individual and
representative capacity because, they claim, she is not the real party in interest. Defendants
Case 2:25-cv-00520-DAK-CMR Document 37 Filed 12/01/25 PageID.<pageID>
Page 1 of 3

2
next seek to dismiss the fraud claims because, they contend, Plaintiffs have failed to plead
sufficient facts that Defendants either made misrepresentations or failed to disclose material
information notwithstanding a duty to do so. And finally, Defendants argue that Plaintiffs’
“mistake” claim and declaratory judgment claim hinge on an allegation of unconscionability,
which Defendants contend is conclusory and unsupported.
Plaintiffs, to the contrary, argue that they have alleged sufficient facts to support all
their causes of action. Out of an abundance of caution, however, they have filed a conditional
Motion for Leave to Amend, including a proposed Second Amended Complaint, in the event the
court dismisses any of their claims. Plaintiffs, however, do not contest the dismissal of Lisa
Hackford’s claims, individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Todd Killian,
provided that the dismissal is without prejudice.1
Accordingly, the court dismisses Lisa Hackford’s claims (both individually and as Personal
Representative of the Estate of Todd Killian) without prejudice. As to the claims Brandon
Hackford, as Trustee of the TripleKRanch Trust, the court is satisfied that Plaintiffs have pleaded
sufficient facts to state plausible claims, and dismissal of any claim in the Amended Complaint
would be premature at this juncture. In making this determination, the court has not
considered what Defendants characterize as “the extraneous matters” raised in Plaintiffs’
opposition memorandum, and thus, Defendants’ Motion to Strike and/or Disregard Extraneous
Matters is moot.
1 See ECF No. 23 at 1 n.1 and 23 n.7. The referenced page numbers refer the page numbering
generated by CM/ECF in the heading of each page.
Case 2:25-cv-00520-DAK-CMR Document 37 Filed 12/01/25 PageID.<pageID>
Page 2 of 3

3
CONCLUSION
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Amended
Complaint [ECF No. 18] is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The claims brought by Lisa
Hackford, individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Todd Killian, are
DISMISSED without prejudice. The court declines to dismiss the claims brought by Brandon
Hackford, as Trustee of the TripleKRanch Trust. Plaintiffs’ Conditional Motion for Leave to
Amend [ECF No. 19] is DENIED AS MOOT; and Defendants’ Motion to Strike and/or Disregard
Extraneous Matters [ECF No. 30] is DENIED AS MOOT. The hearing previously set for December
11, 2025, is vacated.
DATED this 1st day of December 2025.
BY THE COURT:
DALE A. KIMBALL
United States District Judge
Case 2:25-cv-00520-DAK-CMR Document 37 Filed 12/01/25 PageID.<pageID>
Page 3 of 3