Progressive Specialty Insurance Company v. Mims et al

Filing 105

JUDGMENT: It is the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the court that Defendant Dazia M. Fumbah's 99 Request for Judgment is treated as an objection and said objection is overruled. The United States Magistrate Judge's 95 Recommendation is adopted. Judgment is entered in favor of plaintiff Progressive Specialty Insurance Company and against defendant Fumbah on plaintiff Progressive Specialty Insurance Company's complaint as further set out in the order. Defendant Fumbahs request a gainst plaintiff Progressive Specialty Insurance Company for a declaratory judgment as to whether plaintiff Progressive Specialty Insurance Company is liable to defendant Fumbah isdismissed without prejudice as premature. It is further ORDERED that p laintiff Progressive Specialty Insurance Company and defendant Fumbah are to bear their own costs. The clerk of the court is DIRECTED to enter this document on the civil docket as a final judgment pursuant to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This case is not closed, for defendant Fumbahs crossclaims against defendant Mims are still pending. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 5/24/2012. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Appeals Checklist) (dmn, )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, SOUTHERN DIVISION

PROGRESSIVE SPECIALTY
INSURANCE COMPANY,
Plaintiff,
v.
DAZIA M. FUMBAH,
Defendant and
Crossclaim Plaintiff,
v.
LARRY DWAYNE MIMS,
Crossclaim Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CIVIL ACTION NO.
1:10cv681-MHT
(WO)

JUDGMENT
In accordance with the memorandum opinion entered
this date, it is the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the
court as follows:
(1) Defendant Dazia M. Fumbah’s request for judgment
(doc.

no.

99)

is

treated

objection is overruled.

as

an

objection

and

said

(2) The

United

States

Magistrate

Judge’s

recommendation (doc. no. 95) is adopted.
(3) Judgment
Progressive
defendant

is

entered

Specialty

Fumbah

on

in

favor

Insurance
plaintiff

Company

of

plaintiff

and

Progressive

against

Specialty

Insurance Company’s complaint.
(4) As to defendant Fumbah (albeit only to the extent
plaintiff Progressive Specialty Insurance Company seeks
a declaration binding as to defendants Larry Dwayne Mims
and Paula Denise Traylor and not binding as to defendant
Fumbah),
Company

plaintiff
has

no

duty

Progressive
to

provide

Specialty
liability

Insurance
insurance

coverage under the terms of a policy issued to defendant
Mims for any claim, matter, or allegations associated
with the June 18, 2008, accident.
(5) As to defendant Fumbah (albeit only to the extent
plaintiff Progressive Specialty Insurance Company seeks
a declaration binding as to defendants Mims and Traylor
and

not

binding

as

to

defendant

2

Fumbah),

plaintiff

Progressive Specialty Insurance Company has no duty to
provide a defense to defendants Mims and Traylor and no
duty to indemnify them for any lawsuits arising out of
the June 18, 2008, accident.
(6) Defendant

Fumbah’s

request

against

plaintiff

Progressive Specialty Insurance Company for a declaratory
judgment as to whether plaintiff Progressive Specialty
Insurance

Company

is

liable

to

defendant

Fumbah

is

dismissed without prejudice as premature.
It is further ORDERED that plaintiff Progressive
Specialty Insurance Company and defendant Fumbah are to
bear their own costs.
The clerk of the court is DIRECTED to enter this
document on the civil docket as a final judgment pursuant
to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
This

case

is

not

closed,

for

defendant

Fumbah’s

crossclaims against defendant Mims are still pending.
DONE, this the 24th day of May, 2012.

/s/ Myron H. Thompson
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE