Mason v. Safeco Insurance Company of America

Justia Dockets & Filings Eighth Circuit Missouri Eastern District Mason v. Safeco Insurance Company of America

Mason v. Safeco Insurance Company of America

Plaintiff:	Jimmy Mason
Defendant:	Safeco Insurance Company of America
Case Number:	4:2009cv01081
Filed:	July 10, 2009
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
Office:	St. Louis Office
County:	St. Charles
Presiding Judge:	Charles A. Shaw
Presiding Judge:
Nature of Suit:	Defendant
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Jury Demanded By:	Defendant

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
December 6, 2010	Filing 63 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs motion to preclude the testimony of defendants expert witness Stephen A. Knox is GRANTED in part, DENIED in part as moot, and DENIED in part without prejudice, as follows: [Doc. 57 ] The mo tion is GRANTED as to Mr. Knoxs testimony (1) that the Sea Ray would have grown mold between 2004 and the present because of storage conditions, whether it had been flooded or not, (2) that it is unlikely there is mold growing on the Sea Rays wire ru ns, and (3) concerning mold growth on any exposed wood in the Sea Ray. The motion is DENIED as moot as to Mr. Knoxs testimony that if the Sea Ray had been properly dried following the accident accelerated mold growth would not have occurred, as Mr. K nox will not offer such testimony. The motion is DENIED without prejudice as to Mr. Knoxs testimony that: (1) through existing access panels, the Sea Rays interior can be completely cleaned and dried as proposed by Mr. Narconis, and (2) through exist ing access panels, the insides of the cabinets and hull can be cleaned by hand, as recommended by Mr. Wellington, without dismantling the interior. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff is granted leave to supplement his experts reports to address (1) whether and to what extent access panels exist in the Sea Ray boat, (2) whether any access panels are available to aid in remediation of the mold within the Sea Ray, and (3) whether and to what extent use of the access panels would have on the cost to undertake Wellingtons remediation plan. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that parties shall confer and submit a proposed modification to the Case Management Order to incorporate dates for the supplemental expert discovery, within five (5) days of the date of this Order. Signed by Honorable Charles A. Shaw on 12/6/10. (KJS)
August 23, 2010	Filing 56 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant Safeco Insurance Company of America's motion for summary judgment is DENIED. [Doc. 35] Signed by Honorable Charles A. Shaw on 8/23/2010. (NCL)

Date Filed

Document Text

December 6, 2010

Filing 63 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs motion to preclude the testimony of defendants expert witness Stephen A. Knox is GRANTED in part, DENIED in part as moot, and DENIED in part without prejudice, as follows: [Doc. 57 ] The mo tion is GRANTED as to Mr. Knoxs testimony (1) that the Sea Ray would have grown mold between 2004 and the present because of storage conditions, whether it had been flooded or not, (2) that it is unlikely there is mold growing on the Sea Rays wire ru ns, and (3) concerning mold growth on any exposed wood in the Sea Ray. The motion is DENIED as moot as to Mr. Knoxs testimony that if the Sea Ray had been properly dried following the accident accelerated mold growth would not have occurred, as Mr. K nox will not offer such testimony. The motion is DENIED without prejudice as to Mr. Knoxs testimony that: (1) through existing access panels, the Sea Rays interior can be completely cleaned and dried as proposed by Mr. Narconis, and (2) through exist ing access panels, the insides of the cabinets and hull can be cleaned by hand, as recommended by Mr. Wellington, without dismantling the interior. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff is granted leave to supplement his experts reports to address (1) whether and to what extent access panels exist in the Sea Ray boat, (2) whether any access panels are available to aid in remediation of the mold within the Sea Ray, and (3) whether and to what extent use of the access panels would have on the cost to undertake Wellingtons remediation plan. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that parties shall confer and submit a proposed modification to the Case Management Order to incorporate dates for the supplemental expert discovery, within five (5) days of the date of this Order. Signed by Honorable Charles A. Shaw on 12/6/10. (KJS)

August 23, 2010

Filing 56 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant Safeco Insurance Company of America's motion for summary judgment is DENIED. [Doc. 35] Signed by Honorable Charles A. Shaw on 8/23/2010. (NCL)

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 Missouri Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Mason v. Safeco Insurance Company of America
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Safeco Insurance Company of America
Represented By:	T. Michael Ward
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: Jimmy Mason
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?