Rockwell v. Progressive Insurance

CourtDistrict Court, D. Alaska
DecidedJanuary 10, 2025
Docket4:23-cv-00022
StatusUnknown

This text of Rockwell v. Progressive Insurance (Rockwell v. Progressive Insurance) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Alaska primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Rockwell v. Progressive Insurance, (D. Alaska 2025).

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA

LISA ROCKWELL,

Plaintiff, v.

Case No. 4:23-cv-00022-SLG PROGRESSIVE INSURANCE, et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER ON MOTION FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE Before the Court at Docket 45 is Defendants Progressive Direct Insurance Company, Progressive Insurance, The Progressive Corporation, and Progressive Causality Insurance Company’s (collectively “Progressive”) Motion for Judicial Notice. Plaintiff Lisa Rockwell did not file an opposition. Progressive moves the Court to take judicial notice of a Mortgage, Loan # 400222105294709, recorded in the Charlotte County Cleark of Circuit Court on July 5, 2022, lodged at Docket 45-1, and a Loan Modification Agreement, recorded in the Charlotte County Clerk of Circuit Court on July 24, 2023, lodged at Docket 45-2. Federal Rule of Evidence 201 provides that a court “may judicially notice a fact that is not subject to reasonable dispute because it: (1) is generally known within the trial court’s territorial jurisdiction; or (2) can be accurately and readily determined from sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.”1 Matters of public record, including the “records and reports of administrative bodies,” are proper subjects for judicial notice.2 Courts routinely take judicial notice

of recorded real property documents.3 The two documents lodged at Dockets 45-1 and 45-2 are recorded real property documents, whose authenticity is uncontested. Accordingly, the Court takes judicial notice of these two documents. Progressive’s motion is GRANTED.

DATED this 10th day of January 2025, at Anchorage, Alaska. /s/ Sharon L. Gleason UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1 Fed. R. Evid. 201(b). 2 Anderson v. Holder, 673 F.3d 1089, 1094 n. 1 (9th Cir. 2012) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). 3 E.g., Griffin v. Green Tree Servicing, LLC, 166 F. Supp. 3d 1030, 1040 (C.D. Cal. 2015) (collecting cases); Kirkpatrick v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 699 F. App’x 751 (9th Cir. 2017); Campbell v. Carrington Mortg. Servs. LLC, Case No. 2:16-cv-02011-MC, 2017 WL 1398324, at *2 (D. Or. Apr. 18, 2017); Segle v. PNC Mortg., Case No. 10-5655RJB, 2011 WL 1098936, at *2 (W.D. Wash. Mar. 25, 2011).

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

Related

Anderson v. Holder
673 F.3d 1089 (Ninth Circuit, 2012)
Griffin v. Green Tree Servicing, LLC
166 F. Supp. 3d 1030 (C.D. California, 2015)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Rockwell v. Progressive Insurance, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rockwell-v-progressive-insurance-akd-2025.