Schneider v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company

Filing 27

ORDER that 14 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is DENIED without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 17 Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 23 Motion for Leave to File is GRANTED in part. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 9/10/15. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - TR)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3

Richard Schneider

Case No.: 2:14-cv-01932-JAD-CWH

4

Plaintiff,

5

v.

6

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company,

7

Order Directing Rebriefing to
Incorporate Supplemental Materials
[ECF 14, 17, 23]

Defendant.

8
Three motions are pending in this dispute over whether plaintiff Richard Schneider can stack

9
10

his State Farm car-insurance coverage: cross-motions for summary judgment and Schneider’s motion

11

for leave to file a supplemental brief. Having reviewed the parties’ filings, I find that the most

12

efficient way to address the pending motions is to deny the cross-motions for summary judgment

13

without prejudice and allow the parties to rebrief the summary-judgment issues to incorporate the

14

new information that would have been discussed in their supplemental briefs.
Discussion

15

In March of 2015, Schneider filed a motion for partial summary judgment, and State Farm

16
17

responded with its own countermotion for summary judgment.1 A month after the summary-

18

judgment briefing closed, Schneider produced a document that allegedly explains underinsured-

19

motorist stacking as it relates to his State Farm insurance policies.2 The parties seek to file

20

additional briefs in support of their motions, responses, and replies to include additional argument

21

about this new evidence.3 Rather than allow the parties to file supplemental briefs resulting in

22

piecemeal discussions, I find it would be more efficient to deny both pending summary-judgment

23

motions and allow the parties to file new motions, responses, and replies to incorporate the new

24

evidence.

25
1

26

ECF 14, 16, 17.

2

27
28

See ECF 27 at 2; ECF 24 (the parties disagree over the characterization and relevancy of this
document).
3

ECF 23, 26.

Page 1 of 2

1

Conclusion

2

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Schneider’s motion for partial summary

3
4
5
6

judgment [ECF 14] is DENIED without prejudice.
It is FURTHER ORDERED that State Farm’s countermotion for summary judgment [ECF
17] is DENIED without prejudice.
It is FURTHER ORDERED that Schneider’s motion for leave to file a supplement [ECF 23]

7

is GRANTED in part. The information that would have been included in the supplemental briefs

8

should be included in renewed motions, responses, and replies filed in compliance with the

9

following schedule:

10

C

11
12

summary judgment;
C

13
14

Schneider has until September 21, 2015, to file his renewed motion for partial

State Farm has until October 15, 2015, to file its response to that motion and its own
renewed countermotion for summary judgment;

C

Schneider has until November 9, 2015, to file a reply in support of his renewed

15

motion for partial summary judgment and his response to defendant’s renewed

16

countermotion;

17
18
19

C

State Farm has until November 28, 2015, to file its reply in support of its renewed
countermotion.

DATED this 10th day of September, 2015

20
21
22
23

_________________________________
Jennifer A. Dorsey
United States District Judge

24
25
26
27
28
Page 2 of 2