McCoy v. National Union Fire Insurance Company Of Pittsburgh, PA

Filing 78

ORDER- The court defers ruling on the motion 58 to stay pending a ruling on the motion for summary judgment. If the ruling on the summary judgment motion does not resolve this matter, the motion to stay will be considered by the court at the request of National Union. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated this 14th day of October, 2011, by U.S. Magistrate Judge John V. Acosta.Associated Cases: 3:09-cv-00122-AC, 3:10-cv-00579-AC, 3:10-cv-06126-AC (peg)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF OREGON
PORTLAND DIVISION

Case No.: 3:09-CV-I22-AC

JEFFERY WALSTON, et aI.,
Plaintiffs,

v.
NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE,
COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PA,

ORDER
CONSOLIDATED CASES
3: IO-CV-S79-AC
3:1O-CV-6126-AC

Defendant.
ACOSTA, Magistrate Judge:
Defendant National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA ("National
Union"), moves to stay tll1"ee related civil actions pending resolution of criminal charges
currently filed against Angela McCoy and her brother, Joseph LaCoste. McCoy and LaCoste
have been indicted in federal court on charges of securities fraud, mail fraud, wire fraud, and
bank fraud with regard to investments made by the plaintiffs involving Willamette Development
Services, LLC ("Willamette"). National Union contends that the results of the criminal charges
are directly relevant to the issue of whether McCoy's conduct falls within the exceptions in the
Page I - ORDER

lllsurance policy issued by National Union to McCoy for "fraud, dishonesty, criminal or
malicious acts or omissions" and for knowing wrongful acts. National Union also argues that
McCoy and LaCoste's refusal to answer, or indication that they will refuse to answer, questions
about Willamette and McCoy's relationship with, and actions on behalf of, Willamette until the
conclusion of the criminal proceedings prevents it from meaningfully defending this action, and
results in a deprivation of its due process rights.
After filing the motion for stay, National Union filed a motion for summary judgment
asserting various coverage issues and supported by evidence which does not include testimony
from McCoy or LaCoste. A ruling in favor of National Union on this summary judgment motion
would likely be dispositive of this action and would moot the motion for stay.
The court defers ruling on the motion to stay pending a ruling on the motion for summmy
judgment, which National Union has filed and implicitly represents it can support, even in the
absence of evidence from McCoy and LaCoste on McCoy's involvement with Willamette, and
irrespective of the outcome of the criminal proceedings. If the ruling on summary judgment
motion does not resolve this matter, the motion to stay will be considered by the cOUli at the
request of National Union.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 14th day of October, 2011.

10HN V. ACOSTA

Uni

Page 2 - ORDER

cd States Magistrate Judge