Arrowood Indemnity Company v. Bel Air Mart et al
| Arrowood Indemnity Company |
| Bel Air Mart, R. Gern Nagler and Robert Gern Nagler |
| Bel Air Mart |
| Arrowood Indemnity Company |
| 2:2011cv00976 |
| April 11, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Sacramento |
| Dale A. Drozd |
| John A. Mendez |
| Insurance |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2201 |
| Defendant |
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
96
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 10/1/15 ORDERING having reviewed the Stipulation set forth above, the Court hereby adopts the terms set forth therein by way of this Order. CASE CLOSED.(Becknal, R)
|
|
Filing
94
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 1/16/2015 ORDERING 93 Arrowood's complaint for relief as against Nagler only is DISMISSED with prejudice, each party to bear his or its own attorneys' fees and costs, and Nagler withdraws his tender of defense and indemnity, as well as any and all claims against Arrowood, including, but not limited to, any claims for insurance coverage or benefits; each party to bear his or its own attorneys' fees and costs. (Reader, L)
|
|
Filing
91
ORDER GRANTING BEL AIR'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART ARROWOODS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; AND SANCTIONING ARROWOOD'S COUNSEL signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 3/3/14. Arrowood'S Counsel Sedgwick is ORDERED to pay $200 in sanctions within ten (10) days of the date of this order.(Mena-Sanchez, L)
|
|
Filing
86
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 10/31/13 GRANTING Continuance of Hearing on the Parties' Motions for Partial Summary Judgment. Motion Hearings re: 60 and 68 RESET for 1/22/2014 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 6 (JAM) before Judge John A. Mendez. (Meuleman, A)
|
|
Filing
73
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 9/6/13: Hearing RESET as to 60 and 68 Motions for Summary Judgment. Motion Hearing set for 11/6/2013 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 6 (JAM) before Judge John A. Mendez. (Manzer, C)
|
|
Filing
66
ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 6/27/13 ORDERING the Court hereby grants the parties' joint motion and continues the hearing date for Arrowood's currently pending Motion for Partial Summary Judgment to September 11, 2013, at 9:30 a.m. (Becknal, R)
|
|
Filing
59
ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 6/3/2013 ORDERING that the Court hereby GRANTS Bel Air Mart's 47 Motion to Compel Arbitration and orders that Arrowood submit all issues concerning the amount of fees it owes for the work of BAM's independent counsel to binding arbitration pursuant to California Civil Code § 2860(c). Arrowood's request for a stay is DENIED. (Zignago, K.)
|
|
Filing
44
STIPULATION and PROTECTIVE ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 1/23/12. (Becknal, R)
|
|
Filing
42
ORDER signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 9/7/2011 GRANTING 18 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment filed by Bel Air Mart. (Reader, L)
|
|
Filing
21
ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 6/28/11. The court has received the Notice of Potentially Related Cases concerning the cases filed April 11, 2011. See Local Rule 123, E.D. Cal. (1997). The court has determined, however, that it is in appropriate to relate or reassign the cases, and therefore declines to do so. This order is issued for informational purposes only, and shall have no effect on the status of the cases, including any previous Related (or Non-Related) Case Order of this court. (Meuleman, A)
|
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 California Eastern 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.
