Turn2 Specialty Companies LLC v Mt. Hawley Insurance Company

Filing 79

ORDER granting 78 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File. The requests are GRANTED. Plaintiff's counsel shall have until June 10, 2024 to file a pro hac vice motion and file an amended complaint. Defendant shall respond to the amended complaint within 20 days of its filing. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jennifer L. Rochon on 5/10/2024) (tg)

Download PDF
ANDREW J. FURMAN, ESQUIRE Direct Dial: (212) 574-4119 afurman@chartwelllaw.com Reply To: New York Office One Battery Park Plaza, Suite 710 New York, NY 10004 Phone: (212) 968-2300 Facsimile: (212) 968-2400 May 9, 2024 Via ECF Hon. Jennifer L. Rochon, USDJ United States District Court Southern District of New York 500 Pearl Street, Room 1920 New York, New York 10007 Re: The requests are GRANTED. Plaintiff's counsel shall have until June 10, 2024 to file a pro hac vice motion and file an amended complaint. Defendant shall respond to the amended complaint within 20 days of its filing. SO ORDERED. Dated: May 10, 2024 New York, New York JENNIFER L. ROCHON United States District Judge Turn2 Specialty Companies, LLC v. Mt. Hawley Insurance Company Case No.: 24-cv-03125 [JLR] Dear Judge Rochon: This law firm represents defendant Mt. Hawley Insurance Company (“Mt. Hawley”) in above-referenced matter. We write jointly with counsel for plaintiff Turn2 Specialty Companies, LLC (“Turn2”) to provide the Court with a brief status report of this litigation. Turn2 originally commenced this insurance coverage action against XL Specialty Insurance Company (“XL”) and Everest Indemnity Insurance Company (“Everest”) by filing a complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas on February 13, 2023. The complaint sought a declaration that XL and Everest breached their duties to defend and indemnify Turn2 in numerous personal injury lawsuits arising out of an acetic acid release at a Texas refinery complex on July 27, 2021 (the “Lawsuits”). See ECF Doc. No. 1. Turn2 filed a second amended complaint that named Mt. Hawley, one of its excess insurers, as a defendant on December 1, 2023. See ECF Doc. No. 35. Turn2 claims that Mt. Hawley’s decision to settle one of the Lawsuits was unreasonable and in bad faith. Mt. Hawley interposed its answer to the second amended complaint on January 23, 2024. See, ECF Doc. No. 44. Turn2 subsequently filed a third amended complaint that added Greenwich Insurance Company (“Greenwich”) as a defendant. See ECF Doc. No. 69. On April 10, 2024, the Southern District of Texas granted Mt. Hawley’s motion to sever and transferred Turn2’s claims against Mt. Hawley to the Southern District of New York (the “Order”). See ECF Doc. No. 72. The Order also directed Mt. Hawley to respond to Turn2’s Third Amended Complaint within fourteen (14) days after the transfer was effectuated, which occurred on April 30, 2024. See ECF Doc. Nos. 72, 74. WWW.CHARTWELLLAW.COM Page 2 Turn2 Specialty Companies, LLC v. Mt. Hawley Insurance Company Following the transfer, the parties have agreed that Turn2 will file another amended complaint that contains allegations and claims solely against Mt. Hawley. However, as Turn2’s counsel is not yet admitted in the Southern District, it requested additional time to file a motion for pro hac vice so that it can file an amended pleading. As a result, the parties are requesting that the Court allow Turn2’s counsel 30 days from today to file a pro hac vice motion and to thereafter file an amended complaint. Mt. Hawley would request 20 days from the date that the amended complaint is filed to respond. We thank Your Honor for Your attention to this matter. Very truly yours, CHARTWELL LAW By: _________________________________ Andrew J. Furman Attorneys for Defendant Mt. Hawley Insurance Company TRAHAN KORNEGAY PARTNERS LLP By: ________________________________ Samantha Trahan Attorneys for Plaintiff Turn2 Specialty Companies LLC

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?