Pekin Insurance Company v. Correct Roofing & Construction Inc et al

Filing 73

ORDER granting 70 Motion for Disbursement. Accordingly, the clerk is directed to make payment of $1,700,000, plus any applicable interest of the account, to the "Bobby McDaniel Client Trust Account," to be divided equally between Rains and Turner. Additionally, Pekin's 64 Motion to Dismiss is denied without prejudice. Signed by Chief Judge Brian S. Miller on 9/11/2014. (jak)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS JONESBORO DIVISION PEKIN INSURANCE COMPANY v. PLAINTIFF CASE NO. 3:14CV00135 BSM CORRECT ROOFING & CONSTRUCTION INC., et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER The joint motion for disbursement filed by defendants Michelle E. Rains and Rosia Turner [Doc. No. 70] is granted. On April 2, 2014, plaintiff Pekin Insurance Company deposited two million dollars into the registry of the court pursuant to Rule 67. See Doc. No. 18. On July 16, 2014, $100,000 was disbursed to separate defendant Nichole L. Johnson. See Doc. No. 59. Rains and Turner now move for disbursement of $1,700,000, arguing that while defendants Liberty Mutual Insurance Company and APAC, Inc. are not entitled to any liens, the remaining $200,000 in the registry should satisfy any lien that is found to be valid. Rains and Turner’s request is granted. Accordingly, the clerk is directed to make payment of $1,700,000, plus any applicable interest of the account, to the “Bobby McDaniel Client Trust Account,” to be divided equally between Rains and Turner. Additionally, Pekin’s motion to dismiss the counter-claim and third-party complaint of Liberty Mutual Insurance Company and APAC, Inc. [Doc. No. 64] is denied without prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED this 11th day of September 2014. ________________________________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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?