The Travelers Indemnity Company v. Kuhlman Electric Corporation et al

Filing 344

ORDER granting 278 Motion to Extend Deadline; granting 285 Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages; granting 288 Motion to Stay Proceedings; granting 289 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply ; granting 290 Motion for Leave to F ile; granting 294 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply ; finding as moot 301 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply ; finding as moot 302 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply ; finding as moot 303 Mo tion for Extension of Time to File; finding as moot 304 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply. Further, all discovery in this matter is stayed until this court rules upon Traveler's motion for summary judgment [docket 286] and Kuhlman Electric Corporation's motion to restate, supplement and/or amend pleadings [docket no. 268]. Signed by District Judge Henry T. Wingate on 8/28/12 (TRS)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
JACKSON DIVISION
THE TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY
V.

PLAINTIFF

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:05-cv-590 HTW-LRA

KUHLMAN ELECTRIC CORPORATION,
KUHLMAN CORPORATION, AND
BORGWARNER, INC.

DEFENDANTS

ORDER
The following motions are before the court:
1. Docket no. 278 – BorgWarner and Kuhlman Corporation’s Unopposed
Motion to Extend Scheduling Order;
2. Docket no. 285 - The Travelers Indemnity Company’s Motion To Exceed
Page Limitation;
3. Docket no. 288 - The Travelers Indemnity Company’s Motion to Stay
pending the resolution of its [286] Motion for Partial Summary Judgment;
4. Docket no. 289 - BorgWarner, Inc. and Kuhlman Corporation’s
Unopposed Motion For Leave to Extend Time For Response to [286]
Motion For Summary Judgment;
5. Docket no. 290 - BorgWarner and Kuhlman Corporation’s Motion For
Leave To File Supplemental Information; and
6. Docket no. 294 - Kuhlman Electric Corporation’s Unopposed Motion For
Leave to Extend Time to File Response to [286] Motion For Summary
Judgment.
The parties argued these motions during a telephonic hearing held on
February 28, 2012. This court hereby GRANTS the above motions - docket nos.
278, 285, 288, 289, 290, and 294 and hereby further VACATES the Amended
Scheduling Order [docket no. 262, as amended by docket no. 278] dated
September 12, 2011.
The court also has before it the following unopposed motions for extension
of time:
1. Docket no. 301 - BorgWarner and Kuhlman Corporation’s Unopposed
Motion for Extension of Time to File Response to [286] Motion for
Summary Judgment;
2. Docket no. 302 - Kuhlman Electric Corporation’s Unopposed Motion for
Extension of Time to File Response to [286] Motion for Summary
Judgment;
3. Docket no. 303 - BorgWarner and Kuhlman Corporation’s Unopposed
Motion for Extension of Time to File Response to Travelers’ Motion for
1

Summary Judgment; and
4. Docket no. 304 - Kuhlman Electric Corporation’s Unopposed Motion for
Extension of Time to File Response to [286] Motion for Summary
Judgment.
These motions request additional time to respond to a motion for summary
judgment and other relief filed by Travelers Indemnity Company (“Travelers”)
[docket no. 286]. Since filing these motions, the parties have responded to and
briefed the issues related to this motion, and the court has held initial arguments.
This court, therefore, finds these motions to be moot - docket nos. 301, 302, 303,
304.
Further, all discovery in this matter is stayed until this court rules upon
Travelers’ motion for summary judgment [docket no. 286] and Kuhlman Electric
Corporation’s (“KEC”) motion to restate, supplement and/or amend pleadings
[docket no. 268].
KEC has joined in part and responded in part to Travelers’s motion for
summary judgment. KEC has also filed a motion for summary judgment [docket
no. 310] asking this court to grant summary judgment with respect to Counts III
and IV of Travelers’s complaint. BorgWarner and Kuhlman Corporation (jointly
“BorgWarner”) have filed a motion to strike KEC’s motion for summary judgment.
The court’s review of the docket indicates that this motion to strike is
BorgWarner’s only response to KEC’s motion for summary judgment. KEC’s
motion for summary judgment has already been noticed for hearing. The court
directs BorgWarner to advise the court within five days of this order, whether it
intends to file a response to KEC’s motion for summary judgment.
SO ORDERED, this, the 28th day of August, 2012.
/s/ HENRY T. WINGATE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Order
Civil Action No. 3:05-cv-590-HTW-LRA
2