NBL FLOORING, INC. v. TRUMBALL INSURANCE CO. et al

Filing 50

ORDER THAT DEFTS' MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEDINGS (DOC #31) IS DENIED AS TO THE BREACH OF CONTRACT CLAIMS AGAINST DEFT HARTFORD FINANCIAL SERVICES GROUP, INC. (DCOUNT I). DEFTS' MOTION IS GRANTED AS TO PLFF'S FRAUD CLAIMS (COUNT II ). PLFF'S FRAUD CLAIMS AGAINST BOTH DEFTS ARE DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. DEFTS' MOTION IS DENIED AS TO PLFF'S UNJUST ENRICHMENT CLAIMS (COUNT III), ETC. ( SIGNED BY HONORABLE CYNTHIA M. RUFE ON 8/1/12. ) 8/2/12 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(gn, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
_____________________________________
NBL FLOORING, INC., on behalf of
:
itself and all others similarly situated,
:
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
CIVIL ACTION
v.
:
NO. 10-4398
:
TRUMBALL INSURANCE CO., et al.,
:
:
Defendants.
:
_____________________________________ :
ORDER
AND NOW, this 1st day of August 2012, upon review of Defendants’ Motion for
Judgment on the Pleadings [Doc. No. 31], Plaintiff’s Response in Opposition [Doc. No. 34], and
Defendants’ Reply [Doc. No. 38], and for the reasons set forth in the attached Memorandum
Opinion, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1.

Defendants’ Motion is DENIED as to the breach of contract claims against

Defendant Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. (Count I).
2.

Defendants’ Motion is GRANTED as to Plaintiff’s fraud claims (Count II).

Plaintiff’s fraud claims against both Defendants are dismissed without prejudice.
3.

Defendants’ Motion is DENIED as to Plaintiff’s unjust enrichment claims (Count

III). At this point in the litigation, Plaintiff may maintain its unjust enrichment claims, pled in
the alternative to its breach of contract claims, against both Defendants.
It is so ORDERED.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Cynthia M. Rufe
____________________________
CYNTHIA M. RUFE, J.