Harless et al v. Cincinnati Insurance Company
| Ronald Harless and Stephanie Harlesst |
| Cincinnati Insurance Company |
| Cincinnati Insurance Company |
| Ronald Harless and Stephanie Harlesst |
| 2:2014cv01629 |
| August 21, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama |
| Southern Office |
| Jefferson |
| Harwell G Davis |
| Insurance |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1446 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
14
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND PARTIAL DISMISSAL ORDER - The Court has reviewed the record and Judge Daviss November 5, 2015 report and recommendation. Applying the clearly erroneous standard, the Court ADOPTS the November 5, 2015 report and ACCEPTS Judge D aviss recommendation that the Court enter judgment as a matter of law on the plaintiffs claims for bad faith (Count II) and negligent, reckless and/or wanton claims handling (Count III). The Court DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE the plaintiffs claims for ba d faith (Count II) and negligent, reckless and/or wanton claims handling (Count III). The plaintiffs claim for breach of contract (Count I) and the defendants counterclaim for declaratory judgment remain pending. The Court returns these claims to Judge Davis for further proceedings consistent with this memorandum opinion. Signed by Judge Madeline Hughes Haikala on 3/21/2016. (KEK)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Alabama Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
