TCFI BELL SPE III LLC v. BELL AQUACULTURE LLC et al
TCFI BELL SPE III LLC |
BELL AQUACULTURE LLC |
WESTFIELD INSURANCE COMPANY |
1:2016cv02269 |
August 25, 2016 |
US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
Indianapolis Office |
Mark J. Dinsmore |
Tanya Walton Pratt |
Negotiable Instrument |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 288 ENTRY on Cross Motions for Partial Summary Judgment - Plaintiff Westfield Insurance Company's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment regarding coverage under the EBC Endorsement is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART (Filing No. 99 ), and Defendan t Bell Aquaculture LLC's Cross-motion on coverage is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART (Filing No. 108 ). The EBC Endorsement generally excludes coverage for any loss or damage to animals; however, under the circumstances of this case, the spe cific coverage for spoilage under the EBC Endorsement applies to the loss of Bell's fish, subject to the coverage limit for that specific coverage grant. Westfield's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on the bad faith counterclaim is GRANTED, and that counterclaim is dismissed (Filing No. 143 ). Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 3/30/2019. (TRG) |
Filing 286 ENTRY ON DEFENDANT TCFI'S 116 MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT - For the foregoing reasons, TCFI's Motion for Summary Judgment on its Request for Order of Attachment (Filing No. 116 ) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part (without prejudic e to refile). Summary judgment is granted on TCFI's claim that it has a continuing lien against any amounts payable or that may become payable, if any, by Westfield to Bell. Accordingly, Bell is forbidden from transferring the Insurance Claim s and any proceeds thereof, without written consent or order of this Court. Summary judgment is denied on the issue of attachment. TCFI is granted leave to file a verified motion or motion with affidavits and a request for hearing (or alternatively, attach interrogatories) on the motion for proceedings supplemental to execution. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 3/28/2019. (NAD) |
Filing 285 ENTRY ON PENDING MOTIONS NO. 181 , 193 , 216 AND 217 - For the reasons explained above, Bell's Motion to Incorporate (Filing No. 193) is GRANTED; Bell's Motion to Supplement Appendix (Filing No. 216 ) is GRANTED for the purpose of authenticating the previously-filed designated evidence; Bell's Motion to File Surreply (Filing No. 217 ) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part, and the proposed surreply brief submitted at Filing No. 217-1 is deemed filed as of the d ate of this Entry, but the Court will not consider the section, "II. Westfield's New Legal Arguments," on pages 12 through 13; and Westfield's Objection to Magistrate Judge's Order (Filing No. 181 ) is GRANTED. (See Order.) Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 3/25/2019. (NAD) |
Filing 7 ENTRY ON JURISDICTION - Therefore, the Garnishee Defendant is ORDERED to file a Supplemental Jurisdictional Statement that establishes the Court's jurisdiction over this case. This statement should specifically identify the citizenship of Plaintiff TCFI Bell SPE III LLC. This jurisdictional statement is due fourteen (14) days from the date of this Entry. **SEE ORDER** Copy to Defendant via U.S. Mail. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 8/29/2016.(JLS) Modified on 8/30/2016 (JLS). |
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 Indiana Southern 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.