Sonoco Products Company et al v. ACE INA Insurance et al

Filing 24

ORDER granting 23 Motion to Stay. Signed by Honorable R Bryan Harwell on 8/31/2012.(hcic, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
FLORENCE DIVISION
Sonoco Products Company and Sonoco )
)
Canada Corporation,
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
v.
)
ACE INA Insurance, ACE American )
Insurance Company, National Union Fire )
Insurance Company of Pittsburgh d/b/a )
Chartis Insurance, Westport Insurance )
Corporation d/b/a Industrial Risk Insurers, )
)
and Munich Reinsurance America, Inc.,
)
)
Defendants.
)

Civil Action No. 4:11-cv-02366-RBH

ORDER

This matter is before the Court pursuant to the Consent Motion filed by the parties
seeking a stay of this litigation. This is an insurance case arising out of a roof collapse
that occurred at Plaintiff Sonoco Canada Corporation’s (“Sonoco Canada”) mill located
in Trent Valley, Canada, on July 16, 2010. There are two separate policies that relate to
the collapse. The Complaint asserts claims by both Plaintiffs against the Defendants
ACE American Insurance (“ACE American”), Westport Insurance Corporation d/b/a
Industrial Risk Insurers (“Westport”), National Union Fire Insurance Company of
Pittsburgh (“National Union”), Munich Reinsurance America, Inc. (“Munich Re”), and
ACE INA Insurance (“ACE INA”) under all risk property insurance policies issued by
ACE American, National Union, Westport and Great Lakes Reinsurance (UK) PLC.

Those policies are identified in the Complaint as the “US Master Policy” (“Master
Policy”).
The Complaint also asserts claims by Sonoco Canada against Defendant ACE
INA under a separate policy issued in Canada, identified in the Complaint as the
Canadian Policy (“Canadian Policy”).
In an order dated July 11, 2012, the Court dismissed the Defendant ACE INA
from this action, leaving Sonoco Canada and ACE INA to address their disputes pursuant
to a claim that is concurrently pending between those entities in Ontario, Canada
(“Canadian claim”). The parties have agreed and moved that this action and all discovery
should be stayed pending a final resolution of the Canadian claim since the outcome of
that claim will likely impact this claim and could make this claim moot.
IT IS ORDERED that this action and all previously imposed deadlines herein be
stayed until such time as the Canadian claim is resolved or upon further order of the
Court. Counsel for Plaintiff shall file a status report with this Court within 30 days of the
resolution of the Canadian claim updating the Court and the Defendants if there are any
issues remaining in this case.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that none of the remaining parties shall serve
written discovery on any other party, notice any deposition for any party or witness, or
conduct any form of discovery in this action while this matter is stayed.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/R. Bryan Harwell
R. Bryan Harwell
United States District Judge
Florence, South Carolina
August 31, 2012

2