CORLEY v. NATIONAL INDEMNITY COMPANY et al
ORDER THAT THE MOTION TO REMAND IS DENIED; THE MOTION TO DISMISS AS TO STERLING IS GRANTED; THE MOTION TO STRIKE IS GRANTED; AND PURSUANT TO RULE 11(c)(3), PLAINTIFF AND/OR PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL IS ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE AS TO WHAT INQUIRY PLAINTIF F AND/OR HIS ATTORNEY MADE IN DECIDING TO NAME STERLING AS A DEFENDANT. PLAINTIFF'S ATTORNEY IS ALSO ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE AS TO WHY HE SHOULD NOT BE SANCTIONED UNDER 28 U.S.C. 1927. THE COURT WILL HAVE A HEARING AT WHICH PLAINTIFF AND PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL MUST BE PRESENT, ON 5/16/2016, COURTROOM 3A AT 10:00 AM, ETC. SIGNED BY HONORABLE MICHAEL M. BAYLSON ON 4/18/16. 4/19/16 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(ti, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
NATIONAL INDEMNITY COMPANY
and STERLING CLAIM SERVICES,
And NOW, this 18th day of April, 2016, for the reasons stated in the foregoing
Memorandum, upon consideration of Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand (ECF 9), Sterling Claim
Services, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Sixth Amended Complaint (ECF 7), and National
Indemnity Company’s Motion to Strike Certain Allegations in Plaintiff’s Sixth Amended
Complaint (ECF 8), and all responses and replies thereto, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1. The Motion to Remand is DENIED;
2. The Motion to Dismiss as to Sterling is GRANTED;
3. The Motion to Strike is GRANTED; and
4. Pursuant to Rule 11(c)(3), Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff’s counsel is ORDERED to show
cause as to what inquiry Plaintiff and/or his attorney made in deciding to name Sterling
as a defendant and continually asserting Sterling was a proper defendant, and also why
Plaintiff and/or his attorney filed six amended complaints rather than respond to the
merits of Sterling’s preliminary objections.
5. Plaintiff’s attorney is also ORDERED to show cause as to why he should not be
sanctioned under 28 U.S.C. § 1927, which allows for costs/attorney’s fees against an
attorney in certain circumstances which may be applicable here.
6. Plaintiff’s counsel must submit a response within fourteen (14) days of the date of this
Order. Defendants may respond within seven (7) days thereafter.
7. The Court will have a hearing at which Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s counsel must be present,
on May 16, 2016, Courtroom 3A at 10:00 a.m. The hearing will include a Rule 16
Pretrial Conference to discuss discovery and set deadlines.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Michael M. Baylson
MICHAEL M. BAYLSON, U.S.D.J.
O:\CIVIL 16\16-584 Corley v. National Indemnity Co\15cv4944.2016.01.04.order re mtd.doc
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?