LYMAN MORSE BOATBUILDING INC et al v. NORTHERN ASSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA

Filing 15

REPORT OF PRE-FILING CONFERENCE UNDER RULE 56 - By JUDGE D. BROCK HORNBY. (mnw)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MAINE
LYMAN MORSE BOATBUILDING,
INC., ET AL.,
PLAINTIFFS
v.
THE NORTHERN ASSURANCE
COMPANY OF AMERICA,
DEFENDANT

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

NO. 2:12-CV-313-DBH

REPORT OF PRE-FILING CONFERENCE UNDER RULE 56
A pre-filing conference was held on May 15, 2013.
Both parties agree that the issue on Count I (breach of contract) and
Count II (declaratory judgment) of the plaintiffs’ complaint is solely legal. The
sole issue on both counts is whether the defendant, an insurance company,
had a duty to defend the plaintiffs from an arbitration complaint filed against
them in 2011.

The parties agreed to file a stipulated record for these two

counts consisting of the insurance policy, the underlying amended complaint
for arbitration (it may also contain the original complaint), and an arbitration
document determining who were the proper parties.

There are no disputed

facts for these two counts. I agreed that with that stipulated record and Maine
law on duty to defend, no statement of facts is required. Essentially Counts I
and II call for judgment on a stipulated record, not summary judgment. We

concluded collectively that a conference of counsel should be scheduled soon
after the court’s ruling, to determine further proceedings in the case if any.
The defendant may move for summary judgment on Count III of the
plaintiffs’ complaint, an unfair claims settlement practices claim under 24-A
M.R.S.A. § 2436-A. If it does, that will require a statement of material facts
and response thereto.
The following deadlines were established by agreement:
May 31, 2013, for the stipulated record and the plaintiffs’ motion
for (summary) judgment on Counts I and II;
June 21, 2013, for the defendant’s response seeking judgment in
its favor on Counts I and II and any defendant’s motion for summary
judgment on Count III;
July 5, 2013, for the plaintiffs’ reply;
July 12, 2013, for the plaintiffs’ response to the defendant’s motion
(if any) on Count III;
July 26, 2013, for the defendant’s reply on Count III.
After the court’s ruling on the motion, the Clerk’s Office shall schedule a
prompt conference of counsel to determine further proceedings.
SO ORDERED.
DATED THIS 15TH DAY OF MAY, 2013
/S/D. BROCK HORNBY
D. BROCK HORNBY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2