State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Munro

• Court: District Court, W.D. North Carolina
• Decided: February 25, 2020
• Docket: 1:19-cv-00304
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION 1:19 CV 304

STATE FARM MUTUAL ) AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE ) COMPANY ) ) Plaintiff, ) ORDER ) V. ) ) CYNTHIA J. MUNRO and JOHN B. ) MUNRO, III, INDIVIDUALLY, ) AND AS SURVIVING PARENTS OF ) ASHLEIGH MUNRO, and THE ) ESTATE OF ASHLEIGH MUNRO, by ) and through CYNTHIA J. MUNRO, ) Administrator, ) ) Defendants. ) _________________________________ _____ )

This matter is before the Court . On February 24, 2020, the undersigned held a conference call with counsel for the parties during which counsel were advised that the undersigned is a State Farm automobile and homeowner policyholder. The undersigned has in the past made and satisfactorily settled claims with State Farm but does not have any open claims with State Farm at this time. These circumstances do not appear to create any basis for concern about the Court’s ability to preside over this matter. See e.g., Robinson v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 13 F.3d 160, 163 (5th Cir. 1994) (argument that judge should have recused himself because he was a State Farm policyholder “borders on the trivial”); State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Hood, No. CIVA207CV188KSMTP, 2007 WL 4191976 (S.D. Miss. Oct. 10, 2007). Nonetheless, the Court wished to advise the parties of this information and to offer them an opportunity to voice

any concerns they may have or provide any additional information they believe should be considered in this regard. Accordingly, the parties are directed to confer and to file, within 7 days of the entry of this Order, a notice of their positions or any other submissions regarding this issue they deem appropriate. It is so ordered.

Signed: February 24, 2020 Ca 4

W. Carleton Metcalf hy United States Magistrate Judge eA