THE HONORABLE RICARDO S. MARTINEZ
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON - SEATTLE
MID-CENTURY INSURANCE COMPANY, NO.: 2:21-cv-00402-RSM
Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant, STIPULATED MOTION TO STRIKE AND RE-SET THE TRIAL DATE OR, IN THE v. ALTERNATIVE, CONTINUE TRIAL AND PRE-TRIAL DEADLINES AND ORDER COMPANY, NOTE ON MOTION CALENDAR: February 1, 2022 Defendant and Counter-Claimant. Complaint Filed: March 25, 2021 Counter-Claim Filed: June 21, 2021 Trial Date: August 1, 2022
I. STIPULATED MOTION A. Introduction Plaintiff Mid-Century Insurance Company ("Mid-Century") and Defendant American Economy Insurance Company ("American Economy") (jointly the "Parties") by and through their respective counsel of record submit this Stipulated Motion to Strike and Re-Set the Trial Date or, in the Alternative, Continue Trial and Pre-Trial Deadlines. This matter is set for trial on August 1, 2022, and the Parties' Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment (the "Cross-Motions"), noted on the Court's calendar for November 19, 2021, are pending before the Court, and will determine whether trial is necessary. Pre-trial deadlines, including expert designations due February 2, 2022, discovery motions by March 4, 2022, and the discovery cut-off of April 4, 2022, are approaching. (Dkt. 14.) While the Court considers their Cross-Motions, the STIPULATED MOTION TO STRIKE AND RE-SET THE TRIAL Selvin Wraith Halman LLP Parties' respectfully request an order striking and re-setting the trial date, or alternatively, continuing trial. This is an insurance coverage dispute regarding the Parties' obligation, if any, to defend their mutual insured Tahn Associates, LLC ("Tahn") in the Washington State Department of Ecology mandated cleanup of Tahn's property ("Property") located in Seattle Washington ("Ecology Claim"). By way of its Complaint, Mid-Century seeks a judicial declaration that American Economy owes a duty to defend Tahn and is liable to Mid-Century for amounts paid by Mid-Century for Tahn's defense which should have been paid by American Economy and that American Economy must contribute to Tahn's ongoing defense. The Parties issued identical commercial general liability policies of insurance and if American Economy owes no duty to defend Tahn, neither does Mid- Century. American Economy denies it has any obligation to defend or indemnify Tahn against the Ecology Claim, and by its counterclaim seeks a declaration that American Economy has no obligation to reimburse, indemnify, or contribute to Mid-Century for Mid-Century’s current or future expenses for defending and/or indemnifying Tahn against the Ecology Claim. (Dkt. 7, Counterclaim, ¶¶ 23, 29.) The Parties filed early Cross-Motions, were noted for November 19, 2021, on the issues of the duty to defend and contribution by American Economy and are awaiting the Court's rulings. B. Procedural Background Litigation commenced on March 25, 2021 (Dkt. 1). Initial Disclosures were exchanged on July 14, 2021. On July 21, 2021, the Parties filed their Joint Status Report and Discovery Plan (Dkt. 13). On July 30, 2021, the Parties exchanged documents identified in their Initial Disclosures. On August 6, 2021, the Court issued its Order Setting Trial Date and Related Dates ("Scheduling Order") setting Trial on August 1, 2022, and pre-trial deadlines (Dkt. 14). The Parties agreed early dispositive motions could resolve the lawsuit prior to extensive discovery and trial, and stipulated to file early Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 15). The Court issued an Order establishing the Cross-Motions were to be noted on the Court's calendar by STIPULATED MOTION TO STRIKE AND RE-SET THE TRIAL Selvin Wraith Halman LLP November 19, 2021 (Dkt. 16). Briefing is complete and the Cross-Motions are currently pending before the Court (Dkt. 17 - 33). On January 19, 2021, the Parties contacted the Court pursuant to LCR 7(b)(5) to receive a status update regarding when the Court might issue a ruling. The Court was unable to provide an estimated time period for ruling and identified significant COVID-19 pandemic-related impacts on the Court's docket. Under the current Scheduling Order, expert disclosures are due February 2, 2022, the deadline for discovery motions is March 4, 2022, and the discovery cut-off is April 4, 2022 (Dkt. 14). Other than initial disclosures and initial productions of documents, the Parties have not conducted discovery while their Cross-Motions are pending and believe it is in the best interests of the Parties and the Court to continue to stay discovery and trial preparation until rulings are received on the Cross-Motions. Once the Court issues its rulings, the Parties will commence with discovery and prepare for trial (if necessary). The Parties understand and appreciate the strain on the Court's resources created by the pandemic and the outcome of the Parties' Cross-Motions is likely determinative of the legal issues to be resolved in this case. The Parties therefore stipulate and request the Court strike the August 1, 2022, trial date and re-set the trial date once the Court rules on the Parties' Cross-Motions. Striking the August 1, 2022, trial date provides the Court time to rule and a new trial date, which will likely be unnecessary, can be set following the Court's ruling. Alternatively, the Parties stipulate and request a one-year continuance of the August 1, 2022 trial date to August 1, 2023, and all dates set forth in the Court's Scheduling Order (Dkt. 14). This is the first request for a trial continuance. Whether the trial date and related pretrial deadlines should be stricken and re-set or continued for one-year while the Parties' Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment are pending before the Court and the outcome of the Cross-Motions will determine whether trial is necessary. STIPULATED MOTION TO STRIKE AND RE-SET THE TRIAL Selvin Wraith Halman LLP This motion is based upon the pleadings and records on file in this matter. The Court has discretion to modify the case schedule for "good cause." Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 16(b)(6). "A court may modify a deadline for good cause. Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(b). Continuing pretrial and trial dates is within the discretion of the trial judge." Dhunna v. Dep't of Homel & Sec., 2:21-cv-00720-BJR (W.D. Wash. Aug. 4, 2021) (citing King v. State of California, 784 F.2d 910, 912 (9th Cir. 1986). Good cause exists to strike the trial date and pre-trial deadlines. The Parties' Cross-Motions noted for November 19, 2021, are pending before the Court. The outcome of the Cross-Motions is determinative of the legal issues to be resolved in this case. Striking the August 1, 2022, trial date provides the Court time to rule. A new trial date will likely be unnecessary, but can be set following the Court's ruling. Striking the trial date is in the best interest of judicial economy, as the Parties and the Court will not expend resources litigating issues which may become moot (or the issues may change) depending on the Court's ruling. Alternatively, the same end can be achieved by continuing the trial date and all dates in the current Scheduling Order by one year. The Parties believe it is in the Parties' and the Court's best interest to stay discovery and trial preparation while the Court considers the Cross-Motions. /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// STIPULATED MOTION TO STRIKE AND RE-SET THE TRIAL Selvin Wraith Halman LLP Good cause exists to strike the August 1, 2022, trial date and all related pre-trial deadlines and re-set them once the Court has ruled on the Parties' Cross-Motions. Alternatively, good cause exists to extend the trial date and related pre-trial deadlines by one-year, or the Court's first availability thereafter. Dated: February 1, 2022 By: s/Sara M. Parker Sara M. Parker, WA State B
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
THE HONORABLE RICARDO S. MARTINEZ
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON - SEATTLE
MID-CENTURY INSURANCE COMPANY, NO.: 2:21-cv-00402-RSM
Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant, STIPULATED MOTION TO STRIKE AND RE-SET THE TRIAL DATE OR, IN THE v. ALTERNATIVE, CONTINUE TRIAL AND PRE-TRIAL DEADLINES AND ORDER COMPANY, NOTE ON MOTION CALENDAR: February 1, 2022 Defendant and Counter-Claimant. Complaint Filed: March 25, 2021 Counter-Claim Filed: June 21, 2021 Trial Date: August 1, 2022
I. STIPULATED MOTION A. Introduction Plaintiff Mid-Century Insurance Company ("Mid-Century") and Defendant American Economy Insurance Company ("American Economy") (jointly the "Parties") by and through their respective counsel of record submit this Stipulated Motion to Strike and Re-Set the Trial Date or, in the Alternative, Continue Trial and Pre-Trial Deadlines. This matter is set for trial on August 1, 2022, and the Parties' Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment (the "Cross-Motions"), noted on the Court's calendar for November 19, 2021, are pending before the Court, and will determine whether trial is necessary. Pre-trial deadlines, including expert designations due February 2, 2022, discovery motions by March 4, 2022, and the discovery cut-off of April 4, 2022, are approaching. (Dkt. 14.) While the Court considers their Cross-Motions, the STIPULATED MOTION TO STRIKE AND RE-SET THE TRIAL Selvin Wraith Halman LLP Parties' respectfully request an order striking and re-setting the trial date, or alternatively, continuing trial. This is an insurance coverage dispute regarding the Parties' obligation, if any, to defend their mutual insured Tahn Associates, LLC ("Tahn") in the Washington State Department of Ecology mandated cleanup of Tahn's property ("Property") located in Seattle Washington ("Ecology Claim"). By way of its Complaint, Mid-Century seeks a judicial declaration that American Economy owes a duty to defend Tahn and is liable to Mid-Century for amounts paid by Mid-Century for Tahn's defense which should have been paid by American Economy and that American Economy must contribute to Tahn's ongoing defense. The Parties issued identical commercial general liability policies of insurance and if American Economy owes no duty to defend Tahn, neither does Mid- Century. American Economy denies it has any obligation to defend or indemnify Tahn against the Ecology Claim, and by its counterclaim seeks a declaration that American Economy has no obligation to reimburse, indemnify, or contribute to Mid-Century for Mid-Century’s current or future expenses for defending and/or indemnifying Tahn against the Ecology Claim. (Dkt. 7, Counterclaim, ¶¶ 23, 29.) The Parties filed early Cross-Motions, were noted for November 19, 2021, on the issues of the duty to defend and contribution by American Economy and are awaiting the Court's rulings. B. Procedural Background Litigation commenced on March 25, 2021 (Dkt. 1). Initial Disclosures were exchanged on July 14, 2021. On July 21, 2021, the Parties filed their Joint Status Report and Discovery Plan (Dkt. 13). On July 30, 2021, the Parties exchanged documents identified in their Initial Disclosures. On August 6, 2021, the Court issued its Order Setting Trial Date and Related Dates ("Scheduling Order") setting Trial on August 1, 2022, and pre-trial deadlines (Dkt. 14). The Parties agreed early dispositive motions could resolve the lawsuit prior to extensive discovery and trial, and stipulated to file early Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 15). The Court issued an Order establishing the Cross-Motions were to be noted on the Court's calendar by STIPULATED MOTION TO STRIKE AND RE-SET THE TRIAL Selvin Wraith Halman LLP November 19, 2021 (Dkt. 16). Briefing is complete and the Cross-Motions are currently pending before the Court (Dkt. 17 - 33). On January 19, 2021, the Parties contacted the Court pursuant to LCR 7(b)(5) to receive a status update regarding when the Court might issue a ruling. The Court was unable to provide an estimated time period for ruling and identified significant COVID-19 pandemic-related impacts on the Court's docket. Under the current Scheduling Order, expert disclosures are due February 2, 2022, the deadline for discovery motions is March 4, 2022, and the discovery cut-off is April 4, 2022 (Dkt. 14). Other than initial disclosures and initial productions of documents, the Parties have not conducted discovery while their Cross-Motions are pending and believe it is in the best interests of the Parties and the Court to continue to stay discovery and trial preparation until rulings are received on the Cross-Motions. Once the Court issues its rulings, the Parties will commence with discovery and prepare for trial (if necessary). The Parties understand and appreciate the strain on the Court's resources created by the pandemic and the outcome of the Parties' Cross-Motions is likely determinative of the legal issues to be resolved in this case. The Parties therefore stipulate and request the Court strike the August 1, 2022, trial date and re-set the trial date once the Court rules on the Parties' Cross-Motions. Striking the August 1, 2022, trial date provides the Court time to rule and a new trial date, which will likely be unnecessary, can be set following the Court's ruling. Alternatively, the Parties stipulate and request a one-year continuance of the August 1, 2022 trial date to August 1, 2023, and all dates set forth in the Court's Scheduling Order (Dkt. 14). This is the first request for a trial continuance. Whether the trial date and related pretrial deadlines should be stricken and re-set or continued for one-year while the Parties' Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment are pending before the Court and the outcome of the Cross-Motions will determine whether trial is necessary. STIPULATED MOTION TO STRIKE AND RE-SET THE TRIAL Selvin Wraith Halman LLP This motion is based upon the pleadings and records on file in this matter. The Court has discretion to modify the case schedule for "good cause." Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 16(b)(6). "A court may modify a deadline for good cause. Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(b). Continuing pretrial and trial dates is within the discretion of the trial judge." Dhunna v. Dep't of Homel & Sec., 2:21-cv-00720-BJR (W.D. Wash. Aug. 4, 2021) (citing King v. State of California, 784 F.2d 910, 912 (9th Cir. 1986). Good cause exists to strike the trial date and pre-trial deadlines. The Parties' Cross-Motions noted for November 19, 2021, are pending before the Court. The outcome of the Cross-Motions is determinative of the legal issues to be resolved in this case. Striking the August 1, 2022, trial date provides the Court time to rule. A new trial date will likely be unnecessary, but can be set following the Court's ruling. Striking the trial date is in the best interest of judicial economy, as the Parties and the Court will not expend resources litigating issues which may become moot (or the issues may change) depending on the Court's ruling. Alternatively, the same end can be achieved by continuing the trial date and all dates in the current Scheduling Order by one year. The Parties believe it is in the Parties' and the Court's best interest to stay discovery and trial preparation while the Court considers the Cross-Motions. /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// STIPULATED MOTION TO STRIKE AND RE-SET THE TRIAL Selvin Wraith Halman LLP Good cause exists to strike the August 1, 2022, trial date and all related pre-trial deadlines and re-set them once the Court has ruled on the Parties' Cross-Motions. Alternatively, good cause exists to extend the trial date and related pre-trial deadlines by one-year, or the Court's first availability thereafter. Dated: February 1, 2022 By: s/Sara M. Parker Sara M. Parker, WA State Bar #44001 SELVIN WRAITH HALMAN LLP 505 14th Street, Suite 1200 Oakland, CA 94612 Telephone: (510) 874-1811 Facsimile: (510) 465-8976 E-mail: sparker@selvinwraith.com Attorneys for Plaintiff MID-CENTURY INSURANCE COMPANY
Dated: February 1, 2022 By: s/Lauren M. Case Dominica C. Anderson (admitted pro hac vice) Lauren M. Case, WSBA No. 49558 Spear Tower One Market Plaza, Suite 2200 San Francisco, CA 94105-1127 Telephone: (415) 957-3000 Facsimile: (415) 957-3001 Email: dcanderson@duanemorris.com Email: lmcase@duanemorris.com Hari Kumar, WSBA No. 53597 701 Fifth Avenue, 42nd Floor Seattle, WA 98104 Telephone: +1 415 957 3034 Facsimile: +1 206 263 9661 Email: hkumar@duanemorris.com 400101.DOC STIPULATED MOTION TO STRIKE AND RE-SET THE TRIAL Selvin Wraith Halman LLP This matter having come before the Court upon the Parties’ Stipulated Motion to Strike and Re-Set The Trial Date or, in the Alternative, Continue Trial and Pre-Trial Deadlines (the “Stipulated Motion”), and the Court having reviewed the Stipulated Motion and the records and files herein, and otherwise deeming itself fully advised, it is now, therefore: ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the August 1, 2022, trial date and all pre- trial deadlines set forth in the Court's August 6, 2021, Order Setting Trial and Related Dates (Dkt. 14) are stricken. Trial and all related pre-trial deadlines shall be reset, if necessary, once the Court issues its rulings on the Parties' Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment. DATED this 3rd day of February, 2022. A RICARDO S. MARTINEZ CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE STIPULATED MOTION TO STRIKE AND RE-SET THE TRIAL Selvin Wraith Halman LLP