Artisan and Truckers Casualty Co. v. Burlington Insurance Company

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

ARTISAN AND TRUCKERS CASUALTY CO.,

Plaintiff, Case No. 3:21-cv-497-JPG v.

THE BURLINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY, SOUTHERN TRUSS, INC., DOUGLAS FORREST, GAYLON CRUSE, individually and doing business as CRUSE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, and MARK DUCKWORTH.,

Defendants.

THE BURLINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY.,

Defendant/Counter/Cross-Plaintiff,

v.

ARTISAN AND TRUCKERS CASUALTY CO,

Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant,

SOUTHERN TRUSS, INC., DOUGLAS FORREST, GAYLON CRUSE, individually and doing business as CRUSE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, and MARK DUCKWORTH

Cross-Defendants.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER On June 24, 2022, the Court denied both The Burlington Insurance Company (“TBIC”) and Artisan and Truckers Company (“Artisan”) Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. (Doc. 68). The Court found that both TBIC and Artisan had a concurrent duty to defend the underlying action filed in Saline County, Illinois. Id.

On July 25, 2022, the Court ordered the parties to SHOW CAUSE by August 15, 2022 as to why this Court should not dismiss the rest of this case. Specifically, the Court pointed to a directive by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals which stated, “proper disposition” where a court has ruled on the duty to defend but the duty to indemnify was not yet ripe “would have been to dismiss.” See Nationwide Ins. v. Zavalis, 52 F.3d 689, 693 (7th Cir. 1995); Med. Assur. Co. v. Hellman, 610 F.3d 371, 375 (7th Cir. 2010). Both Artisan and TBIC have not responded to this Court’s order to show cause. Therefore, the Court will dismiss this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: August 25, 2022

/s/ J. Phil Gilbert . J. PHIL GILBERT U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE