King County v Travelers Indemnity Company et al

Filing 650

ORDER DENYING 640 motion for protective order filed by Lexington Insurance Company, National Surety Corporation National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh PA and GRANTING 648 Plaintiff's cross motion to compel filed by King County; by Judge Barbara J. Rothstein. (RM) Modified on 2/14/2018 to correct name of party (PM).

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 8 9 KING COUNTY, 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) ) TRAVELERS INDEMNITY CO., ) PROVIDENCE WASHINGTON ) INSURANCE CO., et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ) ) ____________________________________) Civil Action No. 2:14-cv-01957-BJR ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER AND GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S CROSSMOTION TO COMPEL 17 18 19 Having conducted a telephonic discovery conference on February 13, 2018, at which Plaintiff was represented by Paul Del Vechhio and Defendants Lexington Insurance Company and 20 National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh (collectively “AIG”) were represented by 21 22 Linda Clapham, and having reviewed the parties’ briefing, the Court DENIES AIG’s motion for 23 protective order (Dkt. 640) and GRANTS Plaintiff’s cross-motion to compel (Dkt. 648), with the 24 following clarifications. First, AIG shall produce any non-privileged claim files for the period of 25 2013 through 2016. Plaintiff may inquire, to the extent possible, as to AIG’s subjective understanding of this 1997 Agreement. However, any exploration of AIG’s subjective 1 1 2 3 interpretation of the original policy is excluded. Interpretation of the current policy at issue is a matter for the Court, and, therefore, not an appropriate subject of discovery. The Court also excludes from discovery the questions of AIG’s re-insurance and reserves. 4 Plaintiff is entitled to pursue discovery surrounding AIG’s affirmative defenses, including 5 those involving notice and statute of limitations. The Court anticipates that with the parameters 6 7 set forth above, the discovery Plaintiff seeks will be neither extensive nor costly. Dated this 13th day of February, 2018. 8 9 10 11 BARBARA J. ROTHSTEIN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2

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?