Sica v. Progressive Direct Insurance Company
Filing
25
ORDER Granting 24 Stipulation of Dismissal as to Extra Contractual Claims. Signed by Chief Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 1/12/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)
2
3
4
5
STIP
JAMES W. HOWARD, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 4636
THE HOWARD LAW FIRM
9030 W. Cheyenne Avenue, #210
Las Vegas, NV 89129
Tel: 702-293-4600
Fax:702-993-4009
Attorneys for Defendant
jhoward@howardlawlv.com
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
7
8
VINCENT J. SICA,
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case No. 2:16-cv-00513-GMN-VCF
Plaintiff,
vs.
STIPULATION TO DISMISS EXTRA
CONTRACTUAL CLAIMS
PROGRESSIVE DIRECT INSURANCE
COMPANY; DOES I through X; and ROE
CORPORATIONS XI through XX,
Defendants.
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between PlaintiffVIN CENT J. SICA, and
Defendant PROGRESSIVE DIRECT INSURANCE COMPANY, by and through their respective
undersigned counsel of record, that PlaintiffVincent J. Sica's extra contractual causes of action for (1)
bad faith, (2) Defendant Progressive Direct Insurance Company's alleged statutory violations ofNRS
686A.310(b) and (3) the prayer for punitive damages are dismissed. The parties further stipulate that
Plaintiff Sica may maintain his action for contractual uninsured motorist benefits against Defendant
Progressive, though Defendant Progressive retains the right to raise all appropriate defenses to Plaintiff
Sica's claim, including but not limited to, the defense that there was no contact between Mr. Sica's
2
3
motorcycle and the vehicle Mr. Sica alleges hit his motorcycle and fled.
DATED this 91h day of January, 2017.
4
5
6
7
8
9
VANNAH & VANNAH
THE HOWARD LAW FIRM
/s/:James W. i)-{owarci
/s/:John r:B. §reene
By:
--==~--~-=---------------James W. Howard, Esq.
Nevada Bar No. 4636
9030 W. Cheyerme Avenue, #210
Las Vegas, NV 89129
Attorney for Defendants
By:--=---=::-----=------------John B. Greene, Esq.
Nevada Bar No. 4279
400 S. 7 th Street, 4th Floor
Las Vegas, NV 89101
Attorney for Plaintiff
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
3
4
VINCENT J. SICA,
Plaintiff,
5
6
7
8
9
Case No. 2: 16-cv-005 13-GMN-VCF
ORDER
VS.
PROGRESSIVE DIRECT INSURANCE
COMPANY; DOES I through X; and ROE
CORPORATIONS XI through XX,
Defendants.
10
Pursuant to the parties' stipulation it is hereby:
11
ORDERED that PlaintiffVincent J. Sica's extra contractual causes of action for (1) bad faith, (2)
12
Defendant Progressive Direct Insurance Company's alleged statutory violations ofNRS 686A.3 1O(b) and
13
(3) the prayer for punitive damages are dismissed;
14
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that PlaintiffSica may maintain his action for contractual uninsured
15
motorist benefits against Defendant Progressive, though Defendant Progressive retains the right to raise
16
all appropriate defenses to Plaintiff Sica's claim, including but not limited to, the defense that there was
17
no contact between Mr. Sica's motorcycle and the vehicle Mr. Sica alleges hit his motorcycle and fl ed.
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DATED this _!L day of ~,t.,
vy ,
2017.
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?