Premium Standard Farms, LLC v. TIG Insurance Company, corporation

Filing 107

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 29 motion to strike ; denying 31 motion for more definite statement Signed by District Judge Gary A. Fenner on 12/14/09. (Mitchell, Lisa)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION PREMIUM STANDARD FARMS, LLC., f/k/a Premium Standard Farms, Inc., f/k/a PSF Group Holding, Inc., ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) TRAVELERS PROPERTY & CASUALTY ) COMPANY OF AMERICA, f/k/a The ) Travelers Indemnity Company of Illinois, et al., ) ) Defendants, ) ..........................................) TIG INSURANCE COMPANY, f/k/a ) Transamerica Insurance Company and as Sole ) Shareholder of TIG Indemnity Company, ) ) Third-Party Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY ) COMPANY OF AMERICA, f/k/a The ) Travelers Indemnity Company of Illinois, et al., ) ) Third-Party Defendants. ) ORDER Presently before the Court are Plaintiff/Counter-defendant Premium Standard Farms, LLC.'s ("PSF") Motion to Strike or, Alternatively, for More Definite Statement of Defendant TIG Insurance Company's ("TIG") Affirmative Defenses (Doc. #29) and Motion to Dismiss or, Alternatively, for More Definite Statement of TIG's Counterclaims (Doc. #31). PSF argues TIG's affirmative defenses and counterclaims lack the requisite plausibility standard required under Fed. R. Civ. P. Case No. 09-0699-CV-W-GAF 12 and Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007). (Doc. ##30, 32). TIG opposes. (Doc. ##66, 68). When viewing TIG's pleading, including the documents and things encompassed by it, in its entirety, TIG has stated plausible affirmative defenses and counterclaims. See Braden v. WalMart Stores, Inc., F.3d , No. 2009 WL 4062105, at *6 (8th Cir. Nov. 25, 2009) (holding that pleadings should be read in their entirety and "not parsed piece by piece to determine whether each allegation, in isolation, is plausible"). However, the Court does find that TIG's First and Seventh Affirmative Defenses are redundant, as both allege PSF has failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. For these reasons, PSF's Motion to Strike TIG's Affirmative Defenses (Doc. #29) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part and TIG's Seventh Affirmative Defense is STRICKEN. Additionally, PSF's Motion to Strike TIG's Counterclaims (Doc. #31) is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Gary A. Fenner Gary A. Fenner, Judge United States District Court DATED: December 14, 2009 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?