Centex Homes v. Navigators Specialty Insurance Company et al

Filing 56

ORDER Granting 55 Stipulation for Extension of Time. IT IS SO ORDERED: Defendant and Cross-defendant St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company's response to Everest National Insurance Company's Cross-claim is due 14 days after entr y of the Court's order ruling on St. Paul's pending Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff Centex's complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach on 1/31/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 RAMIRO MORALES, # 007101 rmorales@mfrlegal.com MORALES FIERRO & REEVES 600 Tonopah Drive, Suite 300 Las Vegas, NV 89106 Telephone: (702) 699-7822 Facsimile: (702) 699-9455 5 6 Attorneys for Defendant and Cross-defendant ST. PAUL FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 CASE NO.: 2:16-cv-01958-JAD-VCF CENTEX HOMES, a Nevada general partnership, ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) NAVIGATORS SPECIALTY INSURANCE ) COMPANY, a New York corporation; ) EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE ) COMPANY, a Delaware corporation; ) INTERSTATE FIRE & CASUALTY ) COMPANY, an Illinois corporation; ) LEXINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY, a ) Delaware corporation; FEDERAL ) INSURANCE COMPANY, an Indiana ) corporation; and UNDERWRITERS AT ) LLOYDS LONDON, an England corporation; ) ST. PAUL FIRE AND MARINE ) INSURANCE COMPANY, a Connecticut ) corporation, ) ) Defendants. ) ) STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING TO EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY’S CROSS-CLAIM (First Request) 23 24 Defendant and Cross-defendant St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company (“St. Paul”), by and 25 through its counsel of record, Ramiro Morales, of the Law Offices of Morales Fierro & Reeves, and 26 Defendant, Counterclaimant and Cross-claimant Everest National Insurance Company (“Everest”), by and 27 through its counsel of record, Theodore J. Kurtz, of Selman Breitman LLP, hereby stipulate to extend the 28 deadline for St. Paul’s filing of a response to Everest’s Cross-claim. Currently pending before the Court is 1 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CASE NO: 2:16-cv-01958-JAD-VCF 1 St. Paul’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff Centex’s complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. In light of 2 St. Paul’s pending Motion to Dismiss, Everest and St. Paul hereby stipulate and agree that St. Paul’s time to 3 respond to Everest’s complaint shall be extended such that St. Paul’s response to Everest’s cross-claim will 4 be due 14 days from the date of entry of the Court’s order ruling on St. Paul’s Motion to Dismiss. 5 6 This is the first stipulation for the extension of Federal’s time to respond to Everest’s Cross-claim. DATED: January 30, 2017 MORALES FIERRO & REEVES 7 8 By /s/ Ramiro Morales Ramiro Morales (NV Bar No. 7101) 600 South Tonopah Drive, Suite 300 Las Vegas, NV 89106 Telephone: (702) 699-7822 9 10 11 Attorneys for Defendant and Cross-defendant ST. PAUL FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY 12 13 14 DATED: January 30, 2017 SELMAN BREITMAN LLP 15 By: 16 /s/ Theodore J. Kurtz Theodore J. Kurtz (NV Bar No. 1344) 3993 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 200 Las Vegas, NV 89169 Telephone: (702) 430-5902 17 18 19 Attorneys for Defendant, Counterclaimant and Crossclaimant EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY 20 21 [PROPOSED] ORDER 22 23 IT IS SO ORDERED: Defendant and Cross-defendant St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance 24 Company’s response to Everest National Insurance Company’s Cross-claim is due 14 days after entry of the 25 Court’s order ruling on St. Paul’s pending Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff Centex’s complaint for lack of subject 26 matter jurisdiction. 27 1-31-2017 Dated: __________________________ _____________________________________________ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 28 2 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CASE NO: 2:16-cv-01958-JAD-VCF

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?