Conserv Flag Company, LLC v. Twin City Fire Insurance Company

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA

CONSERV FLAG COMPANY, LLC,

Plaintiff, 7:24CV5004

v. ORDER TWIN CITY FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY and HARTFORD FINANCIAL SERVICES GROUP, INC.,

Defendants.

This matter is before the Court on plaintiff Conserv Flag Company, LLC’s (“Conserv Flag”) Motion for Reconsideration (Filing No. 46). Conserv Flag does not state a statutory or procedural basis for its motion but makes clear it does not agree (Filing Nos. 47, 59) with the Court’s prior determination (Filing No. 39) that diversity jurisdiction exists in this case. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1). Reiterating its challenge to the amount in controversy underlying this insurance dispute, see id., Conserv Flag again asks the Court to remand the case to state court. Defendants Twin City Fire Insurance Company and Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc., oppose reconsideration (Filing No. 56). Relying on Nelson v. American Home Assurance Company, 702 F.3d 1038, 1043 (8th Cir. 2012), they maintain reconsideration is limited to “exceptional circumstances requiring extraordinary relief,” not additional arguments that could have been raised sooner. See also Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). After careful review, the Court finds Conserv Flag has failed to identify a compelling reason for the Court to reconsider its decision that the amount of controversy is met in this case. For that reason, Conserv Flag’s motion for reconsideration (Filing No. 46) is denied. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated this 2nd day of October 2024. BY THE COURT:

Robert F. Rossiter, Jr. Chief United States District Judge