Krause v. Nevada Mutual Insurance Company et al

Filing 31

ORDER Granting in part and Denying in part 5 Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. Nevada Mutual Insurance Company and TREAN Corporation shall have 14 days from the date of this Order to answer Counts One through Three of Plaintiff's Complaint. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 6/19/12. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - EDS)

Case 2:12-cv-00342-JCM -CWH Document 30

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

Filed 06/19/12 Page 1 of 3

Marquis Aurbach Coffing
NICK D. CROSBY, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 8996
BRIAN R. HARDY, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 10068
10001 Park Run Drive
Las Vegas, Nevada 89145
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants
Fafinski Mark & Johnson, P.A.
SHANNON MCDONOUGH, ESQ.
Minnesota Bar No. 259512
LISA BACHMAN, ESQ.
Minnesota Bar No. 264313
775 Prairie Center Drive, Suite 400
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
(P) 952-224-9180
(F) 952-995-9577
www.fmjlaw.com
Attorneys Pro Hac Vice for Defendants

14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

16

SANDRA K. KRAUSE,

18
19
20
21
22
23
24

Case No.:

Plaintiff,

17

2:12-cv-00342-JCM-CWH

vs.
NEVADA MUTUAL INSURANCE
COMPANY, a Nevada corporation; TREAN
CORPORATION, a Minnesota Corporation; and
ANDREW O’BRIEN, Individually, DOES 1
through X, and ROE BUSINESS ENTITIES, 1
through X, inclusive,
Defendant.
SECOND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ PARTIAL MOTION
TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT

25

The above-captioned matter came on for hearing on May 24, 2012, on Defendants

26

Nevada Mutual Insurance Company (“NMIC”), TREAN Corporation (“TREAN”), and Andrew

27

O’Brien’s (collectively, “Defendants”) motion to dismiss certain claims in Plaintiff Sandra

28

Krause’s (“Plaintiff”) Complaint. Attorney Shannon M. McDonough, with the law firm of
Page 1 of 3
M&A:12646-002 1707223_1 6/18/2012 4:30 PM

Case 2:12-cv-00342-JCM -CWH Document 30

Filed 06/19/12 Page 2 of 3

1

FAFINSKE MARK & JOHNSON, appeared pro hac vice, with Nick D. Crosby, Esq., with the

2

law firm of MARQUIS AURBACH COFFING, on behalf of Defendants. Attorney Kathleen J.

3

England, with the law firm of ENGLAND LAW OFFICE, appeared on behalf of Plaintiff. After

4

reviewing Defendants’ Motion, Plaintiff’s Opposition thereto, Defendants’ Reply, and all the

5

files, records, and pleadings on file herein, and upon oral argument by counsel, the Court orders

6

as follows:

7
8
9

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ motion is granted in part and denied in part,
as further set forth below:
1.

Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Defendants DOES I through X and the ROE

10

BUSINESS ENTITIES 1 through X is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s claims against the Doe individual

11

defendants and the Roe entity defendants are dismissed.

12
13
14

2.

Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss portions of Counts One, Two and Three against

NMIC and TREAN is DENIED.
3.

Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Count Four of Plaintiff’s Complaint is

15

GRANTED, such that Plaintiff’s intentional infliction of emotional distress claim against all

16

Defendants is dismissed.

17

4.

Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Count Five of Plaintiff’s Complaint is

18

GRANTED, such that Plaintiff’s constructive discharge claim against all Defendants is

19

dismissed.

20

5.

Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Count Six of Plaintiff’s Complaint is GRANTED,

21

such that Plaintiff’s negligent hiring, supervision, and retention claim against NMIC and TREAN

22

is dismissed.

23

6.

Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Count Seven of Plaintiff’s Complaint is

24

GRANTED, such that Plaintiff’s tortuous interference with employment relationship claim

25

against O’Brien is dismissed.

26

7.

Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Count Eight of Plaintiff’s Complaint is

27

GRANTED, such that Plaintiff’s breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing claim

28

against all Defendants is dismissed.
Page 2 of 3
M&A:12646-002 1707223_1 6/18/2012 4:30 PM

Case 2:12-cv-00342-JCM -CWH Document 30

1
2
3

8.

Filed 06/19/12 Page 3 of 3

Defendants NMIC and TREAN shall have 14 days from the date of this Order to

answer Counts One through Three of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

19th day OF ___________,
IT IS SO ORDERED THIS ____ DAYof June, 2012. 2012.

4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
NITED STATES
I
IT

6
7

Respectfully submitted by:

8

MARQUIS AURBACH COFFING

FAFINSKI MARK & JOHNSON, P.A.

9

/s/ Nick D. Crosby, Esq.
Nick D. Crosby, Esq.
Nevada Bar No. 8996
10001 Park Run Drive
Las Vegas, Nevada 89145
Attorney for LVMPD Defendants

/s/ Shannon McDonough, Esq.
SHANNON MCDONOUGH, ESQ.
Minnesota Bar No. 259512
LISA BACHMAN, ESQ.
Minnesota Bar No. 264313
775 Prairie Center Drive, Suite 400
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Attorneys pro hac vice for Defendants

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

Approved as to form and content by:
ENGLAND LAW OFFICE
/s/ Kathleen J. England
Kathleen J. England
Nevada Bar No. 206
630 S. Third Street
Las Vegas, NV 89101
Attorney for Plaintiff

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Page 3 of 3
M&A:12646-002 1707223_1 6/18/2012 4:30 PM