Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company v. Intrepid Group LLC et al
Plaintiff: Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company
Defendant: Intrepid Group LLC, The City Of New York , and Steven Cardona
Case Number: 1:2016cv07928
Filed: October 11, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office: Foley Square Office
County: XX Out of State
Presiding Judge: John G. Koeltl
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2201
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
May 15, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 123 MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER re: 112 MOTION for Reconsideration re; 106 Memorandum & Opinion, filed by Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company, 108 FIRST MOTION for Attorney Fees filed by The City Of New Yo rk, 116 MOTION for Attorney Fees filed by Intrepid Group LLC. Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Co. ("Philadelphia") has filed a motion for reconsideration of the Court's Memorandum Opinion and Order of March 26, 2018, in which the Court denied Philadelphia's motion for summary judgment, awarded summary judgment to Intrepid Group, LLC, and the City of New York, and directed the Clerk to enter judgment against Philadelphia. Dkt. No. 112; see Phila. Inde m. Ins. Co. v. Intrepid Grp., LLC, No. 16-cv-7928, 2018 WL 1517199 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 26, 2018). Intrepid and the City have separately moved for attorneys' fees. Dkt. Nos. 108, 116. Philadelphia's motion for reconsideration is denied with prej udice, and the motions for fees by Intrepid and the City are denied without prejudice; as further set forth herein. Philadelphia therefore fails to show the need to correct a clear error or prevent manifest injustice. Accordingly, Philad elphia's motion for reconsideration is denied. The motions for fees filed by Intrepid and the City are premature because Philadelphia may appeal the judgment in this case. The motions by Intrepid and the City are therefore denied without prejud ice and may be renewed thirty days after the time to appeal has expired or, if an appeal is taken, thirty days after a mandate issues from the Court of Appeals. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(2)(B) advisory committee's notes to the 1993 amendment ("[T]he court under [Rule 54(d)(2)(B)] may effectively extend the period [for filing a motion for fees] by permitting claims to be filed after resolution of the appeal."). (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 5/15/2018) (mro)
March 26, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 106 MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER re: 61 MOTION for Summary Judgment (Notice of Motion) filed by Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company, 67 MOTION to Dismiss filed by The City Of New York, 82 MOTION for Summary Ju dgment filed by Intrepid Group LLC. The Court has considered all of the arguments raised by the parties. To the extent not specifically addressed, the arguments are either moot or without merit. For the foregoing reasons, Intrepid's motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56(a) and the City's request for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 (f) (1) are granted; Philadelphia's motion for summary judgment is denied; and the City's motion to dismiss is dismissed as moot. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment against Philadelphia, to close all pending motions, and to close this case. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 3/26/2018) (mml)
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 New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company v. Intrepid Group LLC et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company
Represented By: Christopher T. Bradley
Represented By: Anna Elisabeth Gabbay
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 ]
Defendant: Intrepid Group LLC
Represented By: Jeffrey S. Shein
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 ]
Defendant: The City Of New York ,
Represented By: Sabita Lakshmi Krishnan
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 ]
Defendant: Steven Cardona
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?