KERSEY V. ANTHEM INSURANCE COMPANIES, INC.

Justia Dockets & Filings Seventh Circuit Indiana Southern District KERSEY V. ANTHEM INSURANCE COMPANIES, INC.

KERSEY V. ANTHEM INSURANCE COMPANIES, INC.

Plaintiff:	TERESA KERSEY
Defendant:	ANTHEM INSURANCE COMPANIES, INC.
Case Number:	1:2016cv03335
Filed:	December 9, 2016
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Office:	Indianapolis Office
Presiding Judge:	William T. Lawrence
Presiding Judge:	Debra McVicker Lynch
Nature of Suit:	Contract: Recovery/Enforcement
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Insurance Contract
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
November 17, 2017	Filing 39 ORDER denying Defendant's 29 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. For the reasons set forth above, AICI's motion to dismiss is DENIED. That said, the question of whether AICI is a party to the relevant insurance contract is a question of fact that, frankly, should not be difficult to answer. It seems to the Court that it is a question that should be answered sooner, rather than later. It simply needs to be answered in the summary judgment context, rather than by a mo tion to dismiss. Accordingly, the parties are ORDERED to contact Magistrate Judge Lynch to request a case management conference, at which a schedule for limited discovery on the question of whether AICI is a proper defendant to this action should be established, along with a schedule for briefing an expedited initial motion for summary judgment on that limited issue if the parties are unable to agree on the answer to that question. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 11/17/2017. (JDC)

Date Filed

Document Text

November 17, 2017

Filing 39 ORDER denying Defendant's 29 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. For the reasons set forth above, AICI's motion to dismiss is DENIED. That said, the question of whether AICI is a party to the relevant insurance contract is a question of fact that, frankly, should not be difficult to answer. It seems to the Court that it is a question that should be answered sooner, rather than later. It simply needs to be answered in the summary judgment context, rather than by a mo tion to dismiss. Accordingly, the parties are ORDERED to contact Magistrate Judge Lynch to request a case management conference, at which a schedule for limited discovery on the question of whether AICI is a proper defendant to this action should be established, along with a schedule for briefing an expedited initial motion for summary judgment on that limited issue if the parties are unable to agree on the answer to that question. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 11/17/2017. (JDC)

Access additional case information on PACER

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 this case: KERSEY V. ANTHEM INSURANCE COMPANIES, INC.
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: ANTHEM INSURANCE COMPANIES, INC.
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: TERESA KERSEY
Represented By:	Guy O. Kornblum
Represented By:	David F. McNamar
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

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.

Why Is My Information Online?