Hill v. ASSURANCEFORENINGEN SKULD (Gjensidig) et al
| Amy Hill |
| ASSURANCEFORENINGEN SKULD (Gjensidig) and SKULD Mutual Protection and Indemnity Association (Bermuda) Ltd. |
| 1:2015cv00025 |
| August 6, 2015 |
| US District Court for the District of Guam |
| Hagatna Office |
| Guam |
| Frances M. Tydingco-Gatewood |
| Joaquin V.E. Manibusan |
| Insurance |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| 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
110
Decision and Order Adopting in Part and Modifying in Part 73 Report and Recommendations; granting 23 Motion to Dismiss under the doctrine of forum non conveniens ; denying 71 Motion to Strike. The court hereby MODIFIES the Report' s forum non conveniens determination. Norway is an adequate alternative forum and the balance of private and public factors weigh heavily of dismissal on the basis of forum non conveniens. The court also ADOPTS the Report's conclus ion that the parties' dispute should be arbitrated in Norway. Therefore, Skuld's Motion to Dismiss for an alternative forum is GRANTED. Signed by Chief Judge Frances M. Tydingco-Gatewood on 3/9/2017. (related document(s): 77 Objection to Report and Recommendation filed by ASSURANCEFORENINGEN SKULD (Gjensidig), SKULD Mutual Protection and Indemnity Association (Bermuda) Ltd., 81 Objection to Report and Recommendation filed by Amy Hill)(fad, ) **Modified on 3/9/2017 to edit docket text** (fad, ).
|
|
Filing
73
Report And Recommendations re 23 Motion to Dismiss [Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b) and Forum Non Conveniens], or in the Alternative, to Compel Arbitration [9 U.S.C. § 206] filed by ASSURANCEFORENINGEN SKULD (Gjensidig), SKULD Mutual Protectio n and Indemnity Association (Bermuda) Ltd. The undersigned hereby recommends the following: (1) that the Chief Judge find that service of process was improper, but in lieu of dismissal, the proper remedy would be to quash said service and order Pl aintiff to properly serve Defendants within a reasonable time period; (2) that the Chief Judge deny the motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction; (3) with regard to the direct action claim, that the Chief Judge stay these proceedings until the appeals pending in the Ninth Circuit in CV 11-00032 and CV 11-00034 are resolved; (4) that the Chief Judge deny the motion to dismiss based on forum non conveniens; and (5) that the Chief Judge stay this proceeding and compel the Plaintiff to ar bitrate her claim in Norway, but only after (a) proper service has been made on theDefendants and (b) the pending appeals are resolved. Objections to R&R due within fourteen (14) days from the date of service. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joaquin V.E. Manibusan, Jr on 4/4/2016. (fad, )
|
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 Guam 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.
