Parklyn Bay Company, LLC v. Liberty Insurance Corporation et al
| Parklyn Bay Company, LLC |
| Liberty Insurance Corporation, Liberty Surplus Insurance Corporation, Liberty Insurance Underwriters, Inc. and Liberty International Underwriters |
| 3:2013cv03124 |
| July 5, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| San Francisco Office |
| Alameda |
| Edward M. Chen |
| Insurance |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Insurance Contract |
| 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
85
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 84 Notice of Voluntary Dismissal filed by Liberty Surplus Insurance Corporation. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 6/9/16. (bpfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/9/2016)
|
|
Filing
83
ORDER re 82 Notice of settlement and to stay all discovery and pretrial deadlines (Other) filed by Parklyn Bay Company, LLC. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 4/12/16. (bpfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/12/2016)
|
|
Filing
72
ORDER by Judge Edward M. Chen granting 56 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment; denying 60 Motion for Summary Judgment (emclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/12/2015)
|
|
Filing
64
SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING ORDER--RESPONSES DUE TODAY AT 4 PM PDT. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 7/28/15. (emclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/28/2015)
|
|
Filing
62
SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING ORDER--RESPONSE DUE BY 9 AM PDT, JULY 28, 2015. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 7/24/15. (emclc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/24/2015)
|
|
Filing
45
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 44 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER To Amend Complaint and Withdraw Motion to Dismiss filed by Parklyn Bay Company, LLC, Motions terminated: 40 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Liberty Surplus Insurance Corporation, 44 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER To Amend Complaint and Withdraw Motion to Dismiss filed by Parklyn Bay Company, LLC.. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 9/5/14. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/5/2014)
|
|
Filing
42
STIPULATION AND ORDER RESETTING MOTION TO 10/9/14 re 41 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER to Continue Hearing, Opposition and Reply Dates re Motion to Dismiss filed by Liberty Surplus Insurance Corporation. CMC RESET FROM 9/4/14 TO 10/9/14 AT 1:30 P.M. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 7/30/14. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/30/2014)
|
|
Filing
26
STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING MEDIATION DEADLINE. CMC RESET FROM 2/4/14 TO 3/27/14 AT 10:30 A.M. Case Management Statement due by 3/20/2014. Further Case Management Conference set for 3/27/2014 10:30 AM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco.. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 1/6/14. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/6/2014)
|
|
Filing
20
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Private ADR, STIPULATION AND ORDER re 17 STIPULATION and Proposed Order selecting Private ADR by Liberty Insurance Corporation. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 9/25/13. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/25/2013)
|
|
Filing
16
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 15 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER for dismissal of all claims against Liberty Insurance Corporation, Liberty International Underwriters and Liberty International Underwriters, Inc. filed by Liberty Insurance Corporation, Liberty Insurance Underwriters, Inc., Liberty Surplus Insurance Corporation, Liberty International Underwriters. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 8/7/13. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/7/2013)
|
|
Filing
11
STANDING ORDER. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 7/17/13. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/17/2013)
|
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 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.
