National Interstate Ins. Co. v. Acceptance Casualty Ins. Co.

CourtDistrict Court, E.D. California
DecidedJune 1, 2023
Docket2:22-cv-02127
StatusUnknown

This text of National Interstate Ins. Co. v. Acceptance Casualty Ins. Co. (National Interstate Ins. Co. v. Acceptance Casualty Ins. Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
National Interstate Ins. Co. v. Acceptance Casualty Ins. Co., (E.D. Cal. 2023).

Opinion

1 McCormick, Barstow, Sheppard, Wayte & Carruth LLP 2 Nicholas H. Rasmussen, #285736 nrasmussen@mccormickbarstow.com 3 Graham A. Van Leuven, #295599 graham.vanleuven@mccormickbarstow.com 4 Daniella M. Crisanti, #341051 daniella.crisanti@mccormickbarstow.com 5 7647 North Fresno Street Fresno, California 93720 6 Telephone: (559) 433-1300 Facsimile: (559) 433-2300 7 Attorneys for Plaintiff NATIONAL 8 INTERSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY

9 Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP Robert J. Romero, #136539 10 rromero@hinshawlaw.com Peter J. Felsenfeld, #260433 11 pfelsenfeld@hinshawlaw.com Robert Levy, #81024 12 rlevy@hinshawlaw.com 50 California Street, Ste. 2900 13 San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 362-6000 14 Facsimile: (415) 834-9070

15 Attorneys for Defendant ACCEPTANCE CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY 16

17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 18 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SACRAMENTO DIVISION 19 20 NATIONAL INTERSTATE INSURANCE Case No. 2:22-CV-02127-TLN-KJN COMPANY, 21 STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER Plaintiff, 22 Trial Date: - v. 23 ACCEPTANCE CAUSALITY INSURANCE 24 COMPANY,

25 Defendant.

26 27 Pursuant to Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff NATIONAL 1 and Defendant ACCEPTANCE CAUSALITY INSURANCE COMPANY (“ACIC”) in case no. 2 2:22-CV-02127-KJN (National Interstate and ACIC are collectively referred to as the “PARTIES”), 3 through their undersigned counsel, jointly submit this Stipulated Protective Order (“PROTECTIVE 4 ORDER”) to govern the handling of information and materials produced in the course of discovery 5 or filed with the Court in advance of trial in this ACTION. 6 I. PURPOSES AND LIMITATIONS 7 DISCLOSURE and discovery activity in this ACTION are likely to involve production of 8 confidential, privileged, proprietary, or private information for which special protection from public 9 disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecuting this litigation may be warranted. 10 Accordingly, the PARTIES to this ACTION hereby stipulate to and petition the Court to enter the 11 following PROTECTIVE ORDER. 12 The PARTIES acknowledge that this PROTECTIVE ORDER does not confer blanket 13 protections on all disclosures or responses to discovery and that the protection it affords from public 14 disclosure and use extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled to confidential 15 treatment under established legal principles. The PARTIES further acknowledge, as set forth in 16 Section 12.3, below, that this PROTECTIVE ORDER does not automatically entitle them to file 17 confidential information under seal; rather Eastern District Local Rule 141 sets forth the procedures 18 that must be followed and the standards that will be applied when a PARTY seeks permission from 19 the Court to file material under seal. 20 Nothing in this PROTECTIVE ORDER shall be deemed an admission by any PARTY that 21 certain categories or types of DOCUMENTS or information contain proprietary or confidential 22 information. Each PARTY retains the right to challenge any and all information designated 23 “CONFIDENTIAL,” as defined in Paragraph 3.3 below, through the procedures detailed in this 24 PROTECTIVE ORDER. Nothing in this PROTECTIVE ORDER shall be deemed a waiver of any 25 such rights. 26 THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, AGREED, AND JOINTLY REQUESTED 27 by and between the PARTIES, by and through their respective counsel of record, that this COURT 1 and according to the following terms and provisions. 2 II. GOOD CAUSE STATEMENT PURSUANT TO L.R. 141.1(C) 3 This Action is a coverage dispute between insurance carriers relating to their respective 4 obligations with respect to the settlement of certain underlying litigation on behalf of the parties’ 5 mutual insureds. A resolution of the Parties’ claims and defenses in this action will require 6 consideration of, among other factors, whether the settlement of the UNDERLYING LITIGATION 7 was “reasonable”, and whether the insured and the Parties complied with and fulfilled their 8 respective obligations in connection with the policies of insurance issued by National Interstate and 9 ACIC and their duties of good faith and fair dealing. Furthermore, at least some federal courts 10 applying California law have concluded that the “common interest” doctrine does not apply to the 11 exchange of information with a non-defending insurer notwithstanding any obligation of 12 cooperation imposed in a policy of insurance, such that the disclosure of such otherwise privileged 13 communications between the insureds and/or counsel retained to represent the insureds and a 14 defending insurer, on the one hand, and a non-defending insurer, on the other, may operate as a 15 waiver of those privileges with respect to such communications and documents. See, e.g., 16 Continental Cas. Co. v. St. Paul Surplus Lines Ins. Co., 265 F.R.D. 510, 526-530 (E.D.Cal. 2010). 17 Accordingly, this action is likely to involve such CONFIDENTIAL and privileged materials, for 18 which special protection from public disclosure and from use for any purpose other than prosecution 19 and defense of this ACTION is warranted. 20 Such CONFIDENTIAL and proprietary materials and information may consist of, among 21 other things, documents and testimony which National Interstate believes are subject to the attorney- 22 client privilege and/or work product doctrines, including the correspondence and testimony of 23 attorneys retained by National Interstate to defend the insured and to negotiate a settlement of the 24 underlying action concerning their views and analysis of: (1) the insureds’ potential liability for the 25 claims asserted against them in the underlying litigation; (2) the underlying plaintiffs injuries and 26 damages and the insureds’ potential exposure thereto; (3) the reasonableness of the settlement 27 ultimately negotiated in the underlying litigation in light of facts such as the insureds’ potential 1 implicating privacy rights of third PARTIES); information otherwise generally unavailable to the 2 public; and information that may be otherwise protected from DISCLOSURE under state or federal 3 statutes, court rules, case decisions, or common law. 4 ACIC anticipates it may be asked to produce CONFIDENTIAL and proprietary materials 5 and information relating to its business practices and the subject excess insurance policy. ACIC 6 further expects it may be asked to produce CONFIDENTIAL documents and/or communications 7 relating to its evaluation of whether coverage obligations have arisen under the subject ACIC excess 8 policy with respect to the defense and settlement of the underlying action. ACIC may also be asked 9 to produce CONFIDENTIAL documents and/or communications containing information otherwise 10 generally unavailable to the public; and information that may be otherwise protected from 11 DISCLOSURE under state or federal statutes, court rules, case decisions, or common law. 12 Accordingly, to expedite the flow of information, to facilitate the prompt resolution of 13 disputes over confidentiality of discovery materials, to adequately protect information the PARTIES 14 are entitled to keep CONFIDENTIAL, to ensure that the PARTIES are permitted reasonably 15 necessary use of such material in preparation for and in the conduct of proceedings in this ACTION, 16 to address their handling at the end of the litigation, and to serve the ends of justice, a protective 17 order for such information is justified in this matter. It is the intent of the PARTIES that information 18 will not be designated as CONFIDENTIAL for tactical reasons and that nothing be so designated 19 without a good-faith belief that it has been maintained in a CONFIDENTIAL, nonpublic manner, 20 and there is good cause why it should not be part of the public record of this case. 21 Statement Under L.R.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
National Interstate Ins. Co. v. Acceptance Casualty Ins. Co., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/national-interstate-ins-co-v-acceptance-casualty-ins-co-caed-2023.