ROMERO, et al v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE, et al

Filing 455

ORDER THAT PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS DENIED; ALLSTATE'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS DENIED; AND DEFENDANT LIDDY'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS DENIED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE RONALD L. BUCKWALTER ON 2/27/14. 2/28/14 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED, E-MAILED.(ti, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
GENE R. ROMERO, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.

ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY,
et al.,
Defendants.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CIVIL ACTION
NO. 01-3894
CONSOLIDATED WITH
NO. 01-6764
NO. 01-7042

ORDER
AND NOW, this 27th day of February, 2014, upon consideration of (1) the Motion by
Plaintiffs Gene R. Romero, et al. (collectively “Plaintiffs”) for Summary Judgment on the
Release (Docket No. 373), Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Statement of Facts (Docket No. 381), the
Response of Defendants Allstate Insurance Company, et al. (collectively “Allstate”) in
Opposition (Docket No. 397), Allstate’s Responses to Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Statement of
Facts (Docket No. 402), Plaintiffs’ Amended Reply Brief (Docket No. 433), and Plaintiffs’
Amended Reply in Support of their Statement of Facts (Docket No. 436); (2) Allstate’s Motion
for Summary Judgment on the Validity and Enforcement of the Release (Docket No. 370);
Allstate’s Statement of Undisputed Facts (Docket No. 374), Plaintiffs’ Responses to Defendants’
Statement of Facts (Docket No. 405), Plaintiffs’ Amended Response in Opposition (Docket No.
418), Allstate’s Reply Brief (Docket No. 429), and Allstate’s Reply to Responses to Allstate’s
Statement of Facts (Docket No. 436); and (3) Defendant Edward Liddy’s joinder Motion for
Summary Judgment (Docket No. 371), Plaintiffs’ Response (Docket No. 418), and Defendant
Liddy’s Reply (Docket No. 430), and upon review of the voluminous declarations and exhibits

submitted by the parties in connection with these Motions, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1.

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED;

2.

Allstate’s Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED; and

3.

Defendant Liddy’s Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED.

It is so ORDERED.

BY THE COURT:

s/ Ronald L. Buckwalter
RONALD L. BUCKWALTER, S.J.