Erwin v. Lyndon Southern Insurance Company et al

Filing 16

ORDER: Out of an abundance of caution, the Court will treat the defendants' motions as ones for summary judgment. The parties are given up to, and including, 2/16/2018 to present all materials that are pertinent to the defendants' now motions for summary judgment. 9 & 11 . Signed by Magistrate Judge Patricia S. Harris on 1/26/2018. (jak)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
JONESBORO DIVISION

DAVID ERWIN
v.

PLAINTIFF
NO. 3:17-cv-00333 JM/PSH

LYNDON SOUTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY
and SANTANDER CONSUMER USA

DEFENDANTS

ORDER
Plaintiff David Erwin (“Erwin”) began the case at bar by filing a pro se complaint
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1332 and joining defendants Lyndon Southern Insurance Company
(“Lyndon Southern”) and Santander Consumer USA (“Santander”). The defendants have
now filed separate motions to dismiss, see Docket Entry 9, 11, and have submitted
exhibits in support of their motions. In the motions, the defendants maintain that the
Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction because the amount in controversy does not
exceed $75,000.00. They therefore maintain that Erwin’s complaint should be dismissed
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1). The defendants alternatively
maintain that the complaint should be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 12(b)(6) because it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.1

1

The  defendants  offer  different  reasons  for  requesting  the  dismissal  of  the  complaint  pursuant  to  Rule 
12(b)(6). Lyndon Southern maintains that the complaint should be dismissed because “the 2014 Kia Optima was not 
an automobile covered by ... Erwin’s insurance policy with Lyndon Southern on the date of loss and, even if it were, 
coverage was excluded as the keys were left in the automobile at the time of the alleged theft.” See Docket Entry 9 
at CM/ECF 1. Santander maintains that the complaint should be dismissed because any dispute between Erwin and 
Santander is governed by a valid, enforceable arbitration agreement. 

The Court does not know at this time what disposition will be made of the
defendants’ motions to dismiss or whether their exhibits will be considered in resolving
the motions. Out of an abundance of caution, the Court will treat the defendants’
motions as ones for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56.
See Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(d).2 The parties are given up to, and including,
February 16, 2018, to present all materials that are pertinent to the defendants’ now
motions for summary judgment.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 26th day of January, 2018.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2

Rule 12(d) provides, in full, the following: “If, on a motion under Rule 12(b)(6) or 12(c), matters outside the 
pleadings are presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion must be treated as one for summary judgment 
under Rule 56. All parties must be given a reasonable opportunity to present all the material that is pertinent to the 
motion.” The Court recognizes that the requirements of Rule 12(d) do not apply to a motion filed pursuant to Rule 
12(b)(1), but it is best to simply treat the motions as ones for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56. 

2