Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

American States Insurance Co. v. Great American Insurance Co.

United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle

June 6, 2018

AMERICAN STATES INSURANCE COMPANY, an Indiana corporation; and FIRST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, a New Hampshire corporation, Plaintiffs,
v.
GREAT AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, an Ohio corporation, Defendant. GREAT AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, an Ohio corporation, Counter-plaintiff,
v.
AMERICAN STATES INSURANCE COMPANY, an Indiana corporation; and FIRST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, a New Hampshire corporation, Counter-defendants.

          WILSON SMITH COCHRAN & DICKERSON JOHN M. SILK, LISA C. NEAL, ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFFS

          MCNAUL EBEL NAWROT & HELGREN PLLC TIMOTHY B. FITZGERALD, LESLIE E. BARRON, ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT

          BATESCAREY LLP BY MICHAEL T. SKOGLUND, JONATHAN A. CIPRIANI, OMMID C. FARASHAHI

          STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND DISCOVERY CUTOFF FOR LIMITED PURPOSES

          HONORABLE ROBERT S. LASNIK UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CHIEF JUDGE

         Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 16(b)(4) and LCR 16(b)(5), Plaintiffs/Counter-defendants American States Insurance Company and First National Insurance Company of America (collectively, "Plaintiffs" or "ASIC") and Defendant/Counter-plaintiff Great American Insurance Company ("Defendant" or "GAIC"), by and through their undersigned counsel of record, hereby stipulate and move the court to continue the deadline for specific discovery to be completed in this matter as described below.

         I. FACTS

         The discovery cutoff for this matter is June 3, 2018. See Dkt. 19. Trial is set for October 18, 2018. The parties have to date exchanged Initial Disclosures, written discovery, and exchanged documents. Expert reports have been exchanged. As of June 1, 2018, two expert witnesses will have been deposed. One out-of-state ASIC company representative was deposed on May 31, 2018.[1] The documents supporting GAIC's counterclaim are voluminous, and were produced on March 20, 2018.[2] A No. of topics regarding which GAIC has requested testimony required review of those documents. Further, the parties have worked through substantive disputes regarding the production of some documents by ASIC, arriving at an agreement that would allow production and avoid motion practice on May 30, 2018. A No. of topics regarding which GAIC requests testimony require preparation on topics that are the subject of the May 30, 2018, agreement. Finally, one category of documents requested by GAIC, documents held by ASIC regarding the underwriting of insurance policies issued to Sea Shepherd's underwriting, will be either produced subject to the May 30, 2018, agreement, or Sea Shepherd will oppose GAIC's pending motion to compel (Dkt. 61). GAIC has requested that an ASIC representative testify regarding those underwriting materials, and this deposition must await either production of the documents or this Court's ruling on Sea Shepherd's opposition, if filed.

         Upcoming Discovery:

• Deposition of Frank Cordell, ASIC expert witness; expert report provided May 21, 2018;
• Deposition of two ASIC company representatives pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 30(b)(6), first requested May 4, 2018;
• Deposition of GAIC's non-retained experts (seven); first disclosed April 4, 2018; and
• Response to Subpoenas Duces Tecum by GAIC's non-retained experts.

GAIC's non-retained experts were designated as "may calls" on issues reliant upon the production of the documents on March 20, 2018 and June 1, 2018. As stated, ASIC's expert witness on the same topic completed his report on May 21, 2018. Meanwhile, the witnesses were contacted by ASIC counsel following designation. Those witnesses who responded to requests for deposition dates were unavailable prior to the discovery cutoff;[3] one witness indicated that he did not have the records that would allow him to testify as designated, some witnesses failed to respond to the request for deposition dates, and other witnesses resisted deposition for personal reasons or otherwise.[4] ASIC issued subpoenas duces tecum that could obviate the need for deposition, but two witnesses have objected to those subpoenas, and deposition may be necessary.[5] One witness requested additional time to respond (until mid-June).[6] None of the witnesses have yet responded to the subpoenas duces tecum, which set a deadline of June 1, 2018.[7] Additional time is needed to allow for die orderly scheduling of these witnesses.

         Counsel Schedules

ASIC Counsel ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.