RLI Insurance Company v. City of Visalia, California

Filing 46

STIPULATION and ORDER Entering Judgment under FED. R. CIV. P. 54(b) and Directing Clerk of Court to Terminate RLI as a Party signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 04/12/2018. (Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6

Leonard C. Herr, # 081896
Ron Statler, #234177
HERR PEDERSEN & BERGLUND LLP
Attorneys at Law
100 Willow Plaza, Suite 300
Visalia, California 93291
Telephone: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant/Counter-Claimant,
CITY OF VISALIA

7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, FRESNO DIVISION

10
11

RLI INSURANCE COMPANY,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

v.
CITY OF VISALIA,

15
16
17

Defendant.

20
21

STIPULATION AND ORDER
ENTERING JUDGMENT UNDER
FED. R. CIV. P. 54(b) AND
DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO
TERMINATE RLI AS A PARTY

CITY OF VISALIA,
Counter-Claimant,

18
19

Case No.: 1:17-CV-01205-LJO-EPG

v.
RLI INSURANCE COMPANY; ZURICH
AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY;
and THE RIVERSTONE GROUP,
Counter-Defendants.

22
23
24

This Stipulation and proposed Order is made by and between the RLI

25

INSURANCE COMPANY, CITY OF VISALIA, ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE

26

COMPANY and THE RIVERSTONE GROUP (collectively referred to herein as “the

27

Parties.”)

28

///

1

I.

2

RECITALS

3

WHEREAS, on March 19, 2018 the Court entered its Memorandum and

4

Decision and Order Granting the Motion for Judgment (Doc. 43) on the Pleadings

5

filed by Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant RLI; and

6

WHEREAS, the March 19 order appears to end the matter for Plaintiff RLI

7

on all issues even as the case proceeds against other defendants based on other

8

contracts separate from RLI’s, but RLI remains a party under FRCP 54(b); and

9
10

WHEREAS, the parties agree there is no just reason to delay entry of
judgment against RLI as described by FRCP 54(b); and

11
12

WHEREAS, the ends of justice and judicial economy are best served by
granting judgment entered under Rule 54(b) at this time; and

13
14

WHEREAS, the parties recognize final judgment under FRCP 54(b) is at the
trial court’s sound discretion; and

15

WHEREAS, legal counsel for all parties agree to entry of judgment.

16
17

STIPULATION

18

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties to this through their

19

attorneys of record that all parties agree to entry of judgment under FRCP Rule

20

54(b) as to the Court’s Memorandum and Decision and Order Granting Plaintiff’s

21

Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings.

22
23

Dated: April 9, 2018

BERKES CRANE ROBINSON & SEAL LLP

24
25

By_____/s/ Steven M. Crane_______________
STEVEN M. CRANE
Attorney for Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant
RLI INSURANCE COMPANY

26
27
28

///

1

Dated: April 9, 2018

HERR PEDERSEN & BERGLUND LLP

2
By_____/s/ Leonard C. Herr_____________
LEONARD C. HERR
Attorney for Defendant/
Counter-Claimant,
CITY OF VISALIA

3
4
5
6
7

Dated: April 9, 2018

SINNOTT, PUEBLA, CAMPAGNE & CURET, APLC

8
By_____/s/Randy M. Marmor____________
RANDY M. MARMOR
Attorney for Counter-Defendant,
ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

9
10
11
12

Dated: April 9, 2018

GORDON REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI, LLP

13
14
15
16

By_____/s/Christopher R. Wagner________
CHRISTOPHER R. WAGNER
Attorney for Counter-Defendant,
THE RIVERSTONE GROUP

17
18

ORDER & JUDGMENT

19

The record in this case reveals that the March 19, 2018 memorandum

20

decision and order, ECF No. 43, granting RLI’s motion for judgment on the

21

pleadings, ECF No. 12, and dismissing the City of Visalia’s counterclaim for

22

declaratory relief against RLI, see ECF Nos. 9 & 43 at 26, disposed of all claims

23

brought by or against RLI and involved issues that were distinct from any issues

24

remaining in the case. Therefore, allowing entry of separate judgment pursuant to

25

Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b) in favor of RLI and against the City of Visalia on all claims

26

between them in this case would not be adverse to the interests of judicial

27

economy, as any immediate appeal of the issues decided in the March 19, 2018

28

1

Order will not risk any appellate court having to decide the same issues more than

2

once.

3
4
5
6
7

Accordingly, based on the above joint stipulation of the Parties, and good
cause appearing therefor,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the judgment under Rule 54(b) is entered as
to the order granting Plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings.
The Clerk of Court is therefore directed terminate only RLI as a party. The

8

case shall remain OPEN.

9

IT IS SO ORDERED.

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Dated:

April 12, 2018

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____
UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE