Travelers Property Casualty Company of America et al v. Centex Homes

Filing 232

ORDER re (231 in 3:11-cv-03638-SC) Statement filed by Centex Homes. Signed by Judge Samuel Conti on 8/18/2015. (sclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/18/2015)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA United States District Court For the Northern District of California 8 9 10 TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CONNECTICUT; and ST. PAUL FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY, 11 12 13 Plaintiffs, v. CENTEX HOMES; and CENTEX REAL ESTATE CORPORATION, 14 Defendants. 15 16 ) Case No. 11-CV-03638-SC ) ) RESPONSE TO STATUS REPORT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 17 18 19 On December 13, 2013, the Court granted Defendants' motion to 20 stay this case pending the outcome of the California Supreme 21 Court's decision in Hartford Cas. Ins. Co. v. J.R. Mktg., L.L.C., 22 No. S211645, 2015 WL 4716917 (Cal. Aug. 10, 2015). 23 On August 102, 2015, the California Supreme Court issued its 24 Opinion. 25 ECF No. 224. On August 17, 2015, the parties filed a joint status report 26 requesting a status conference to discuss what actions may need to 27 be taken in light of the California Supreme Court's decision. 28 No. 231. Plaintiffs' position is that additional briefing is ECF 2013 ruling on Centex's motion for reconsideration. 3 position is that any party who believes J.R. Marketing affects a 4 ruling of this Court should bring a motion for leave to file a 5 motion for reconsideration consistent with Local Rule 7-9(a). 6 Court agrees with Centex's position and finds that a status 7 conference at this time is unnecessary. 8 United States District Court needed on the effect of J.R. Marketing on this Court's August 26, 2 For the Northern District of California 1 should file a motion for reconsideration. Centex's The Accordingly, Plaintiffs 9 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. 11 12 Dated: August 18, 2015 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 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?