Nautilus Insurance Company v. Chemtool Incorporated Holian Insulation Company, Inc.

Filing 46

ORDER re: 43 Letter filed by Chemtool Incorporated, 45 Letter filed by Nautilus Insurance Company. It is hereby ORDERED that, by May 12, 2022, Plaintiff shall submit the First Set of Documents with the redactions highlighted for an ex parte and in camera review. Plaintiff shall email the First Set of Documents to Chambers email address at [e-mail]. If the files cannot be attached to the email, the parties shall send an email requesting a secur e link to upload the documents. It is further ORDERED that, by May 12, 2022, Plaintiff shall file (1) a letter on ECF not under seal explaining why the First Set of Documents is privileged and (2) an affidavit or declaration by a person with knowledg e setting forth the factual basis for the assertions that litigation was anticipated at the time the documents were prepared and that the documents were prepared in anticipation of such litigation. It is further ORDERED that the motion to compel the Second Set of Documents is DENIED. The Second Set of Documents is neither "relevant or proportional to the needs of the case." Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 26(b)(1). (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 5/9/2022) (kv)

Case 1:21-cv-09087-LGS Document 46 Filed 05/09/22 Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-------------------------------------------------------------X
NAUTILUS INSURANCE COMPANY,
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
-against:
:
CHEMTOOL INC., et al.,
:
Defendants, :
------------------------------------------------------------ X

21 Civ. 9087 (LGS)
ORDER

LORNA G. SCHOFIELD, District Judge:
WHEREAS, on April 27, 2022, Defendant filed a letter seeking to compel production of
the documents requested in Defendant’s First Requests for Production served on February 10,
2022. Dkt. No. 43.
WHEREAS, Defendant seeks to compel production of the documents in its Request Nos.
2 and 3 of the First Requests for Production (the “First Set of Documents”). The First Set of
Documents pertains to the June 14, 2021 fire (the “Incident”) and adjustment, payment or denial
of claims related to the Incident.
WHEREAS, Defendant also seeks to compel production of the documents in its Request
Nos. 4-6, 9-16, and 18-19 of the First Requests for Production (the “Second Set of Documents”).
The Second Set of Requests consists of promotional materials, claim and training manuals,
personnel records, bonus or incentive plans, documents from other lawsuits, documents
reflecting Nautilus’s goals for claim payments, consumer complaints, reports provided to
regulators, other claims made against Holian, and all documents relating to a Nautilus
endorsement. Dkt. No. 45. Defendant argues, among others, that the Second Set of Documents
is relevant to Plaintiff’s “motivation and approach to coverage determination” and Plaintiff’s
“pattern and practice of claims handling.” Dkt. No. 43.

Case 1:21-cv-09087-LGS Document 46 Filed 05/09/22 Page 2 of 2

WHEREAS, on May 4, 2022, Plaintiff filed a letter opposing the production of the First
and the Second Set of Requests. Dkt. No. 45.
WHERAS, Defendant’s letter at Dkt. No. 43 is construed as a motion to compel.
Plaintiff’s response is construed as an opposition to the motion. It is hereby
ORDERED that, by May 12, 2022, Plaintiff shall submit the First Set of Documents with
the redactions highlighted for an ex parte and in camera review. Plaintiff shall email the First Set
of Documents to Chambers email address at [e-mail]. If
the files cannot be attached to the email, the parties shall send an email requesting a secure link
to upload the documents. It is further
ORDERED that, by May 12, 2022, Plaintiff shall file (1) a letter on ECF not under seal
explaining why the First Set of Documents is privileged and (2) an affidavit or declaration by a
person with knowledge setting forth the factual basis for the assertions that litigation was
anticipated at the time the documents were prepared and that the documents were prepared in
anticipation of such litigation. It is further
ORDERED that the motion to compel the Second Set of Documents is DENIED. The
Second Set of Documents is neither “relevant … or proportional to the needs of the case.” Fed.
R. Civ. Pro. 26(b)(1).
Dated: May 9, 2022
New York, New York