1 THE HONORABLE RICARDO S. MARTINEZ
6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON - SEATTLE 8
9 MID-CENTURY INSURANCE COMPANY, NO.: 2:21-cv-00402-RSM
10 Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant, STIPULATED MOTION TO STRIKE AND RE-SET THE TRIAL DATE OR, IN THE 11 v. ALTERNATIVE, CONTINUE TRIAL AND PRE-TRIAL DEADLINES AND ORDER 12 AMERICAN ECONOMY INSURANCE COMPANY, NOTE ON MOTION CALENDAR: February 1, 13 2022 Defendant and Counter-Claimant. 14 Complaint Filed: March 25, 2021 Counter-Claim Filed: June 21, 2021 15 Trial Date: August 1, 2022
16 I. STIPULATED MOTION 17 A. Introduction 18 Plaintiff Mid-Century Insurance Company ("Mid-Century") and Defendant American 19 Economy Insurance Company ("American Economy") (jointly the "Parties") by and through their 20 respective counsel of record submit this Stipulated Motion to Strike and Re-Set the Trial Date or, in 21 the Alternative, Continue Trial and Pre-Trial Deadlines. 22 This matter is set for trial on August 1, 2022, and the Parties' Cross-Motions for Summary 23 Judgment (the "Cross-Motions"), noted on the Court's calendar for November 19, 2021, are pending 24 before the Court, and will determine whether trial is necessary. Pre-trial deadlines, including expert 25 designations due February 2, 2022, discovery motions by March 4, 2022, and the discovery cut-off of 26 April 4, 2022, are approaching. (Dkt. 14.) While the Court considers their Cross-Motions, the 27 STIPULATED MOTION TO STRIKE AND RE-SET THE TRIAL Selvin Wraith Halman LLP 1 Parties' respectfully request an order striking and re-setting the trial date, or alternatively, continuing 2 trial. 3 This is an insurance coverage dispute regarding the Parties' obligation, if any, to defend their 4 mutual insured Tahn Associates, LLC ("Tahn") in the Washington State Department of Ecology 5 mandated cleanup of Tahn's property ("Property") located in Seattle Washington ("Ecology Claim"). 6 By way of its Complaint, Mid-Century seeks a judicial declaration that American Economy 7 owes a duty to defend Tahn and is liable to Mid-Century for amounts paid by Mid-Century for Tahn's 8 defense which should have been paid by American Economy and that American Economy must 9 contribute to Tahn's ongoing defense. The Parties issued identical commercial general liability 10 policies of insurance and if American Economy owes no duty to defend Tahn, neither does Mid- 11 Century. 12 American Economy denies it has any obligation to defend or indemnify Tahn against the 13 Ecology Claim, and by its counterclaim seeks a declaration that American Economy has no obligation 14 to reimburse, indemnify, or contribute to Mid-Century for Mid-Century’s current or future expenses 15 for defending and/or indemnifying Tahn against the Ecology Claim. (Dkt. 7, Counterclaim, ¶¶ 23, 16 29.) 17 The Parties filed early Cross-Motions, were noted for November 19, 2021, on the issues of the 18 duty to defend and contribution by American Economy and are awaiting the Court's rulings. 19 B. Procedural Background 20 Litigation commenced on March 25, 2021 (Dkt. 1). Initial Disclosures were exchanged on 21 July 14, 2021. On July 21, 2021, the Parties filed their Joint Status Report and Discovery Plan (Dkt. 22 13). On July 30, 2021, the Parties exchanged documents identified in their Initial Disclosures. 23 On August 6, 2021, the Court issued its Order Setting Trial Date and Related Dates 24 ("Scheduling Order") setting Trial on August 1, 2022, and pre-trial deadlines (Dkt. 14). 25 The Parties agreed early dispositive motions could resolve the lawsuit prior to extensive 26 discovery and trial, and stipulated to file early Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 15). The 27 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 1 November 19, 2021 (Dkt. 16). Briefing is complete and the Cross-Motions are currently pending 2 before the Court (Dkt. 17 - 33). 3 On January 19, 2021, the Parties contacted the Court pursuant to LCR 7(b)(5) to receive a 4 status update regarding when the Court might issue a ruling. The Court was unable to provide an 5 estimated time period for ruling and identified significant COVID-19 pandemic-related impacts on 6 the Court's docket. 7 Under the current Scheduling Order, expert disclosures are due February 2, 2022, the deadline 8 for discovery motions is March 4, 2022, and the discovery cut-off is April 4, 2022 (Dkt. 14). 9 Other than initial disclosures and initial productions of documents, the Parties have not 10 conducted discovery while their Cross-Motions are pending and believe it is in the best interests of 11 the Parties and the Court to continue to stay discovery and trial preparation until rulings are received 12 on the Cross-Motions. Once the Court issues its rulings, the Parties will commence with discovery 13 and prepare for trial (if necessary). 14 The Parties understand and appreciate the strain on the Court's resources created by the 15 pandemic and the outcome of the Parties' Cross-Motions is likely determinative of the legal issues to 16 be resolved in this case. 17 The Parties therefore stipulate and request the Court strike the August 1, 2022, trial date and 18 re-set the trial date once the Court rules on the Parties' Cross-Motions. Striking the August 1, 2022, 19 trial date provides the Court time to rule and a new trial date, which will likely be unnecessary, can be 20 set following the Court's ruling. 21 Alternatively, the Parties stipulate and request a one-year continuance of the August 1, 2022 22 trial date to August 1, 2023, and all dates set forth in the Court's Scheduling Order (Dkt. 14). 23 This is the first request for a trial continuance. 24 II. ISSUE PRESENTED 25 Whether the trial date and related pretrial deadlines should be stricken and re-set or continued 26 for one-year while the Parties' Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment are pending before the Court 27 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 1 III. EVIDENCE RELIED UPON 2 This motion is based upon the pleadings and records on file in this matter. 3 IV. AUTHORITY AND ARGUMENT 4 The Court has discretion to modify the case schedule for "good cause." Local Rules W.D. 5 Wash. LCR 16(b)(6). "A court may modify a deadline for good cause. Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(b). 6 Continuing pretrial and trial dates is within the discretion of the trial judge." Dhunna v. Dep't of 7 Homel & Sec., 2:21-cv-00720-BJR (W.D. Wash. Aug. 4, 2021) (citing King v. State of California, 8 784 F.2d 910, 912 (9th Cir. 1986). 9 Good cause exists to strike the trial date and pre-trial deadlines. The Parties' Cross-Motions 10 noted for November 19, 2021, are pending before the Court. The outcome of the Cross-Motions is 11 determinative of the legal issues to be resolved in this case. Striking the August 1, 2022, trial date 12 provides the Court time to rule. A new trial date will likely be unnecessary, but can be set following 13 the Court's ruling. Striking the trial date is in the best interest of judicial economy, as the Parties and 14 the Court will not expend resources litigating issues which may become moot (or the issues may 15 change) depending on the Court's ruling. Alternatively, the same end can be achieved by continuing 16 the trial date and all dates in the current Scheduling Order by one year.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
1 THE HONORABLE RICARDO S. MARTINEZ
6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON - SEATTLE 8
9 MID-CENTURY INSURANCE COMPANY, NO.: 2:21-cv-00402-RSM
10 Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant, STIPULATED MOTION TO STRIKE AND RE-SET THE TRIAL DATE OR, IN THE 11 v. ALTERNATIVE, CONTINUE TRIAL AND PRE-TRIAL DEADLINES AND ORDER 12 AMERICAN ECONOMY INSURANCE COMPANY, NOTE ON MOTION CALENDAR: February 1, 13 2022 Defendant and Counter-Claimant. 14 Complaint Filed: March 25, 2021 Counter-Claim Filed: June 21, 2021 15 Trial Date: August 1, 2022
16 I. STIPULATED MOTION 17 A. Introduction 18 Plaintiff Mid-Century Insurance Company ("Mid-Century") and Defendant American 19 Economy Insurance Company ("American Economy") (jointly the "Parties") by and through their 20 respective counsel of record submit this Stipulated Motion to Strike and Re-Set the Trial Date or, in 21 the Alternative, Continue Trial and Pre-Trial Deadlines. 22 This matter is set for trial on August 1, 2022, and the Parties' Cross-Motions for Summary 23 Judgment (the "Cross-Motions"), noted on the Court's calendar for November 19, 2021, are pending 24 before the Court, and will determine whether trial is necessary. Pre-trial deadlines, including expert 25 designations due February 2, 2022, discovery motions by March 4, 2022, and the discovery cut-off of 26 April 4, 2022, are approaching. (Dkt. 14.) While the Court considers their Cross-Motions, the 27 STIPULATED MOTION TO STRIKE AND RE-SET THE TRIAL Selvin Wraith Halman LLP 1 Parties' respectfully request an order striking and re-setting the trial date, or alternatively, continuing 2 trial. 3 This is an insurance coverage dispute regarding the Parties' obligation, if any, to defend their 4 mutual insured Tahn Associates, LLC ("Tahn") in the Washington State Department of Ecology 5 mandated cleanup of Tahn's property ("Property") located in Seattle Washington ("Ecology Claim"). 6 By way of its Complaint, Mid-Century seeks a judicial declaration that American Economy 7 owes a duty to defend Tahn and is liable to Mid-Century for amounts paid by Mid-Century for Tahn's 8 defense which should have been paid by American Economy and that American Economy must 9 contribute to Tahn's ongoing defense. The Parties issued identical commercial general liability 10 policies of insurance and if American Economy owes no duty to defend Tahn, neither does Mid- 11 Century. 12 American Economy denies it has any obligation to defend or indemnify Tahn against the 13 Ecology Claim, and by its counterclaim seeks a declaration that American Economy has no obligation 14 to reimburse, indemnify, or contribute to Mid-Century for Mid-Century’s current or future expenses 15 for defending and/or indemnifying Tahn against the Ecology Claim. (Dkt. 7, Counterclaim, ¶¶ 23, 16 29.) 17 The Parties filed early Cross-Motions, were noted for November 19, 2021, on the issues of the 18 duty to defend and contribution by American Economy and are awaiting the Court's rulings. 19 B. Procedural Background 20 Litigation commenced on March 25, 2021 (Dkt. 1). Initial Disclosures were exchanged on 21 July 14, 2021. On July 21, 2021, the Parties filed their Joint Status Report and Discovery Plan (Dkt. 22 13). On July 30, 2021, the Parties exchanged documents identified in their Initial Disclosures. 23 On August 6, 2021, the Court issued its Order Setting Trial Date and Related Dates 24 ("Scheduling Order") setting Trial on August 1, 2022, and pre-trial deadlines (Dkt. 14). 25 The Parties agreed early dispositive motions could resolve the lawsuit prior to extensive 26 discovery and trial, and stipulated to file early Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 15). The 27 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 1 November 19, 2021 (Dkt. 16). Briefing is complete and the Cross-Motions are currently pending 2 before the Court (Dkt. 17 - 33). 3 On January 19, 2021, the Parties contacted the Court pursuant to LCR 7(b)(5) to receive a 4 status update regarding when the Court might issue a ruling. The Court was unable to provide an 5 estimated time period for ruling and identified significant COVID-19 pandemic-related impacts on 6 the Court's docket. 7 Under the current Scheduling Order, expert disclosures are due February 2, 2022, the deadline 8 for discovery motions is March 4, 2022, and the discovery cut-off is April 4, 2022 (Dkt. 14). 9 Other than initial disclosures and initial productions of documents, the Parties have not 10 conducted discovery while their Cross-Motions are pending and believe it is in the best interests of 11 the Parties and the Court to continue to stay discovery and trial preparation until rulings are received 12 on the Cross-Motions. Once the Court issues its rulings, the Parties will commence with discovery 13 and prepare for trial (if necessary). 14 The Parties understand and appreciate the strain on the Court's resources created by the 15 pandemic and the outcome of the Parties' Cross-Motions is likely determinative of the legal issues to 16 be resolved in this case. 17 The Parties therefore stipulate and request the Court strike the August 1, 2022, trial date and 18 re-set the trial date once the Court rules on the Parties' Cross-Motions. Striking the August 1, 2022, 19 trial date provides the Court time to rule and a new trial date, which will likely be unnecessary, can be 20 set following the Court's ruling. 21 Alternatively, the Parties stipulate and request a one-year continuance of the August 1, 2022 22 trial date to August 1, 2023, and all dates set forth in the Court's Scheduling Order (Dkt. 14). 23 This is the first request for a trial continuance. 24 II. ISSUE PRESENTED 25 Whether the trial date and related pretrial deadlines should be stricken and re-set or continued 26 for one-year while the Parties' Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment are pending before the Court 27 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 1 III. EVIDENCE RELIED UPON 2 This motion is based upon the pleadings and records on file in this matter. 3 IV. AUTHORITY AND ARGUMENT 4 The Court has discretion to modify the case schedule for "good cause." Local Rules W.D. 5 Wash. LCR 16(b)(6). "A court may modify a deadline for good cause. Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(b). 6 Continuing pretrial and trial dates is within the discretion of the trial judge." Dhunna v. Dep't of 7 Homel & Sec., 2:21-cv-00720-BJR (W.D. Wash. Aug. 4, 2021) (citing King v. State of California, 8 784 F.2d 910, 912 (9th Cir. 1986). 9 Good cause exists to strike the trial date and pre-trial deadlines. The Parties' Cross-Motions 10 noted for November 19, 2021, are pending before the Court. The outcome of the Cross-Motions is 11 determinative of the legal issues to be resolved in this case. Striking the August 1, 2022, trial date 12 provides the Court time to rule. A new trial date will likely be unnecessary, but can be set following 13 the Court's ruling. Striking the trial date is in the best interest of judicial economy, as the Parties and 14 the Court will not expend resources litigating issues which may become moot (or the issues may 15 change) depending on the Court's ruling. Alternatively, the same end can be achieved by continuing 16 the trial date and all dates in the current Scheduling Order by one year. 17 The Parties believe it is in the Parties' and the Court's best interest to stay discovery and trial 18 preparation while the Court considers the Cross-Motions. 19 /// 20 /// 21 /// 22 /// 23 /// 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// STIPULATED MOTION TO STRIKE AND RE-SET THE TRIAL Selvin Wraith Halman LLP 1 Good cause exists to strike the August 1, 2022, trial date and all related pre-trial deadlines and 2 re-set them once the Court has ruled on the Parties' Cross-Motions. Alternatively, good cause exists 3 to extend the trial date and related pre-trial deadlines by one-year, or the Court's first availability 4 thereafter. 5 6 RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, 7 8 Dated: February 1, 2022 By: s/Sara M. Parker 9 Sara M. Parker, WA State Bar #44001 SELVIN WRAITH HALMAN LLP 10 505 14th Street, Suite 1200 Oakland, CA 94612 11 Telephone: (510) 874-1811 Facsimile: (510) 465-8976 12 E-mail: sparker@selvinwraith.com Attorneys for Plaintiff 13 MID-CENTURY INSURANCE COMPANY
14 Dated: February 1, 2022 15 By: s/Lauren M. Case Dominica C. Anderson 16 (admitted pro hac vice) Lauren M. Case, WSBA No. 49558 17 DUANE MORRIS LLP Spear Tower 18 One Market Plaza, Suite 2200 San Francisco, CA 94105-1127 19 Telephone: (415) 957-3000 Facsimile: (415) 957-3001 20 Email: dcanderson@duanemorris.com Email: lmcase@duanemorris.com 21 Hari Kumar, WSBA No. 53597 22 DUANE MORRIS LLP 701 Fifth Avenue, 42nd Floor 23 Seattle, WA 98104 Telephone: +1 415 957 3034 24 Facsimile: +1 206 263 9661 Email: hkumar@duanemorris.com 25 400101.DOC 26 27 STIPULATED MOTION TO STRIKE AND RE-SET THE TRIAL Selvin Wraith Halman LLP 1 ORDER 2 This matter having come before the Court upon the Parties’ Stipulated Motion to Strike and 3 Re-Set The Trial Date or, in the Alternative, Continue Trial and Pre-Trial Deadlines (the “Stipulated 4 Motion”), and the Court having reviewed the Stipulated Motion and the records and files herein, and 5 otherwise deeming itself fully advised, it is now, therefore: 6 ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the August 1, 2022, trial date and all pre- 7 trial deadlines set forth in the Court's August 6, 2021, Order Setting Trial and Related Dates (Dkt. 14) 8 are stricken. Trial and all related pre-trial deadlines shall be reset, if necessary, once the Court issues 9 its rulings on the Parties' Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment. 10 11 DATED this 3rd day of February, 2022. 12 13 A 14 RICARDO S. MARTINEZ 15 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 STIPULATED MOTION TO STRIKE AND RE-SET THE TRIAL Selvin Wraith Halman LLP