Interstate Packaging Company v. Century Indemnity Company et al
| Interstate Packaging Company |
| Century Indemnity Company, Ace Property & Casualty Insurance Company, Ace Fire Underwriters Insurance Company, Great American Insurance Company, United States Fire Insurance Company, Great American Insurance Company of New York, American Casualty Company of Reading, PA., Continental Casualty Company and The American Insurance Company |
| Ace Fire Underwriters Insurance Company, Great American Insurance Company of New York, Great American Insurance Company, Century Indemnity Company and Ace Property & Casualty Insurance Company |
| Century Indemnity Company, Ace Property & Casualty Insurance Company and Ace Fire Underwriters Insurance Company |
| Ace Property & Casualty Insurance Company, United States Fire Insurance Company, Continental Casualty Company, Ace Fire Underwriters Insurance Company, The American Insurance Company, Century Indemnity Company, American Casualty Company of Reading, PA., Great American Insurance Company of New York and Great American Insurance Company |
| Interstate Packaging Company |
| 3:2011cv00589 |
| June 17, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee |
| Nashville Office |
| Dickson |
| E. Clifton Knowles |
| John T. Nixon |
| Insurance |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| Both |
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
210
ORDER DISMISSING CASE: The Court GRANTS Defendants' Motions for SummaryJudgment (Doc. Nos. 94 ; 126 ; 174 ; 193 ) as to Plaintiff's claims. The Court DECLARES (1) Defendants had no duty to defend and no duty to indemnify Plaintiff, and (2) Defendants have not committed any "bad faith refusal to pay" nor any violations of the TCPA. Additionally, the cross-claims raised by Defendants Century Indemnity Company, ACE Property & Casualty Insurance Company, and ACE Fire Under writers Insurance Companyall of which are only applicable if any Defendants are found to have a duty to defend and/or indemnify Plaintiff are DISMISSED AS MOOT. As such, Defendants GAIC and GANY's pending Motion for Summary Judgment on Defen dants' Cross-claims for Declaratory Relief (Doc. No. 101 ) is TERMINATED AS MOOT. This order terminates the Court's jurisdiction over the matter and the case is DISMISSED. It is so ORDERED. Signed by Senior Judge John T. Nixon on 9/25/13. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(la)
|
|
Filing
209
ORDER: The undersigned has denied the Motion to Compel without prejudice to its refiling if and as may be appropriate. Docket No. 208 . For the foregoing reasons, the instant Motion is DENIED AS MOOT. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Magistrate Judge E. Clifton Knowles on 8/12/13. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(la)
|
|
Filing
204
ORDER: Pending before the Court is Defendant United States Fire Insurance Company's Unopposed Motion to Extend Time to File Reply Statement and for Leave to File Reply Memorandum in Further Support of its Motion for Summary Judgment ("Mo tion"). (Doc. No. 203 .) The Court GRANTS the Motion. Defendant shall file its reply on or before July 24, 2013. It is so ORDERED. Signed by Senior Judge John T. Nixon on 7/16/13. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(la)
|
|
Filing
188
ORDER granting 187 Motion to Extend Time to File Reply Statement and for Leave to File Reply Memorandum in support of Motions for Summary Judgment 94 , 126 and 174 . Signed by Magistrate Judge E. Clifton Knowles on 4/26/13. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt)
|
|
Filing
180
ORDER: The Court finds that it did not clearly err in determining that Defendants GANY and GAIC have no duty to defend or to indemnify Plaintiff. Further, the Court did not clearly err in dismissing GAIC as a party to this suit. The Court did err in granting summary judgment on grounds that no "true facts" were developed in the underlying case. However, because the error supported only an alternative ground, Defendants remain entitled to summary judgment and Plaintiffs Motion for Reconsideration 99 is DENIED. Signed by Senior Judge John T. Nixon on 3/29/13. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt)
|
|
Filing
179
ORDER: The Court finds that Plaintiff has not shown good cause foramending the Scheduling Order to permit filing of a motion to amend its Complaint. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS Judge Knowles's Report & Recommendation 159 , and DENIES Plaintiff's Motion to File Amended and Supplemental Complaint 104 . Signed by Senior Judge John T. Nixon on 3/28/13. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt)
|
|
Filing
159
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff's Motion to File Amended and Supplemental Complaint 104 should be DENIED. Signed by Magistrate Judge E. Clifton Knowles on 1/22/13. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt)
|
|
Filing
142
ORDER granting 141 Motion for Leave to File Reply in support of its Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge E. Clifton Knowles on 11/28/12. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt)
|
|
Filing
133
ORDER: This Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery 131 is granted, and with permission of Judge Nixon, the trial date will be continued. The following deadlines are extended as follows: Discovery deadline reset for 4/15/2013. Dispositiv e Motions deadline is reset for 9/1/2013. Jury Trial reset for 2/4/2014 at 9:00 AM before Senior Judge John T. Nixon. Pretrial Conference reset for 1/24/2014 at 10:00 AM before Senior Judge John T. Nixon. (SEE ORDER FOR OTHER DEADLINES). Signed by Magistrate Judge E. Clifton Knowles on 9/4/12. (dt)
|
|
Filing
123
ORDER granting 120 Motion for Leave to File a Reply Brief. Signed by Senior Judge John T. Nixon on 5/11/12. (dt)
|
|
Filing
111
ORDER: The Court GRANTS Plaintiffs Motion for Extension of Time 106 . Plaintiffs deadline to respond to ACC and CCC's Motion for Summary Judgment 94 is extended to twenty days following entry of an Order resolving the Motion to Reconsider. Al so pending before the Court is GAIC and GANY's Motion for Leave to File Response in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration 108 , filed with the proposed Response in Opposition 109 . That Motion is GRANTED and the Court will consider GAIC and GANY's responsive brief. Signed by Senior Judge John T. Nixon on 5/3/12. (dt)
|
|
Filing
88
ORDER: For the reasons stated herein, Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 65 is GRANTED. The Court DECLARES that Defendants Great American Insurance Company and Great American Insurance Company of New York, f/k/a American National Fire Insurance Company, do not owe coverage to Interstate for the NRDC Lawsuit, and they are hereby DISMISSED as defendants to this action. Signed by Senior Judge John T. Nixon on 3/13/12. (dt)
|
|
Filing
23
ORDER granting 22 Motion to Reschedule Initial Case Management Conference. ICMC is reset for 9/7/2011 at 11:00 a.m. Signed by Magistrate Judge E. Clifton Knowles on 7/7/11. (dt)
|
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 Tennessee Middle 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.
