James Dickey, Inc. et al v. Alterra America Insurance Company et al
Filing
44
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE DISMISSAL by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: The Court issues an order to show cause why this action should not be dismissed as moot. Plaintiff shall submit a response no later than January 3, 2017. Failure to respond by that date will result in dismissal of this case without prejudice without further warning from the Court. The stay shall remain in place until that time. (lc)
O
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
United States District Court
Central District of California
8
9
10
11
JAMES DICKEY, INC.,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
15
16
Case No. 5:15-cv-0963-ODW(DTB)
v.
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE
ALTERRA AMERICA INSURANCE
DISMISSAL
COMPANY, AND DOES 1–20,
INCLUSIVE,
17
Defendant.
18
19
Plaintiff James Dickey, Inc. (“Dickey”) brought suit against Defendant Alterra
20
America Insurance Company (“AAIC”) for breach of contract and tortious breach of
21
the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; Plaintiff also seeks declaratory
22
relief.
23
originally filed in the San Bernardino Superior Court on March 23, 2015. (Notice of
24
Removal, ECF No. 1.) Defendants timely removed the action to federal court on May
25
15, 2015. (Id.)
(First Amendment Complaint, ECF No. 29).
Plaintiff’s Complaint was
26
This case relates to an insurance claim for tools stolen from Dickey’s
27
equipment yard during a break-in. (ECF No. 32). The Court previously issued an
28
order staying the case pending an appraisal of the stolen items. (ECF No. 35.) That
1
appraisal is now complete.
(ECF No. 42.)
AAIC asserts that following the
2
completion of the appraisal, it paid Dickey the full appraised value of his claim and
3
thus there is no longer any reason for this suit. (Id.) Accordingly, AAIC wishes to lift
4
the stay and recalendar the motion to dismiss previously pending before the Court
5
issued its order to compel appraisal. (See ECF No. 33.) AAIC indicates that it has not
6
heard from Plaintiff regarding its request to recalendar. (ECF No. 42.) Before
7
considering AAIC’s request to recalendar, and in light of the new facts presented in
8
AAIC request, the Court first wants Plaintiff to explain why this case should not be
9
dismissed outright as the policy appears to have fully paid the relevant claim.
10
Accordingly, the Court issues an order to show cause why this action should not
11
be dismissed as moot. Plaintiff shall submit a response no later than January 3, 2017.
12
Failure to respond by that date will result in dismissal of this case without prejudice
13
without further warning from the Court. The stay shall remain in place until that time.
14
15
IT IS SO ORDERED.
16
December 15, 2016
17
18
19
____________________________________
OTIS D. WRIGHT, II
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?