Starr Indemnity & Liability Company v. Exxon Mobil Corporation

Filing 44

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DENIED 39 MOTION to Lift Stay (Signed by Judge Nancy F Atlas) Parties notified.(sashabranner, 4)

United States District Court
Southern District of Texas

ENTERED
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
STARR INDEMNITY & LIABILITY
COMPANY,
Plaintiff,
v.
EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION,
Defendant.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

May 24, 2016
David J. Bradley, Clerk

CIVIL ACTION NO. H-14-0725

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This insurance coverage dispute is before the Court on the Motion to Lift Stay
and Transfer [Doc. # 39] filed by Starr Indemnity & Liability Company (“Starr”), to
which Exxon Mobil Corporation (“Exxon”) filed a Response [Doc. # 40], and Starr
filed a Reply [Doc. # 43]. Based on the Court’s review of the record, the Court denies
the Motion to Lift Stay and Transfer
In this lawsuit, Starr seeks a declaratory judgment that Exxon is not an
additional insured under insurance policies it issued to Savage Refinery Services, LLC
(“Savage”). By Memorandum and Order [Doc. # 32] entered September 17, 2014, the
Court stayed and administratively closed this case pending a final decision in the
related state court lawsuit, Roberts v. Exxon Mobil Corp., Cause No. 2013-03033 (the
“Roberts Suit”), filed by a Savage employee injured while working at the Exxon
Baytown Refinery. Starr asks the Court to lift the stay because the state district court
P:\ORDERS\11-2014\0725MLiftStay2.wpd

160524.1029

in the Roberts Suit has entered final judgment. Additionally, Starr asks the Court to
transfer this case to the docket of the Honorable David Hittner to be consolidated with
ExxonMobil Corp. v. Starr Indemnity & Liability Co., Civil Action No. H-15-1555
(the “Exxon Suit”). One of the many issues in the Exxon Suit is whether Exxon is an
additional insured under the Starr insurance policies issued to Savage.
The Roberts Suit is currently on appeal to the First Court of Appeals, and
therefore, the rulings in that case are not yet final. Because the Roberts Suit has not
reached final conclusion, it is hereby
ORDERED that the Motion to Lift Stay and Transfer [Doc. # 39] is DENIED.
Any request for this lawsuit to be consolidated into the Exxon Suit should be directed
to Judge Hittner, who previously denied Starr’s request to transfer the Exxon Suit to
the undersigned.
SIGNED at Houston, Texas, this 24th day of May, 2016.

NAN Y F. ATLAS
SENIOR UNI
STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

P:\ORDERS\11-2014\0725MLiftStay2.wpd

160524.1029

2