Filed: Sep. 04, 2015
Latest Update: Sep. 04, 2015
Summary: ORDER ABDUL K. KALLON , District Judge . On July 13, 2015, the magistrate judge entered a report and recommendation, doc. 47, regarding cross-motions for summary judgment filed by plaintiff St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company ("St. Paul"), doc. 33, defendant Town of Gurley ("the Town"), doc. 32, and defendant M&N Materials, Inc. (M&N), doc. 36. The parties were allowed fourteen (14) days in which to file objections to the recommendations made by the magistrate judge. On July 27, 201
Summary: ORDER ABDUL K. KALLON , District Judge . On July 13, 2015, the magistrate judge entered a report and recommendation, doc. 47, regarding cross-motions for summary judgment filed by plaintiff St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company ("St. Paul"), doc. 33, defendant Town of Gurley ("the Town"), doc. 32, and defendant M&N Materials, Inc. (M&N), doc. 36. The parties were allowed fourteen (14) days in which to file objections to the recommendations made by the magistrate judge. On July 27, 2015..
More
ORDER
ABDUL K. KALLON, District Judge.
On July 13, 2015, the magistrate judge entered a report and recommendation, doc. 47, regarding cross-motions for summary judgment filed by plaintiff St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company ("St. Paul"), doc. 33, defendant Town of Gurley ("the Town"), doc. 32, and defendant M&N Materials, Inc. (M&N), doc. 36. The parties were allowed fourteen (14) days in which to file objections to the recommendations made by the magistrate judge. On July 27, 2015, M&N filed objections to the magistrate judge's report and recommendation. Doc. 49. On August 7, 2015, St. Paul filed a response to M&N's objections to the report and recommendation. Doc. 51.
Having reviewed the pleadings, the briefs, the magistrate's report and recommendation, and M&N's objections thereto, the court hereby ADOPTS the report of the magistrate judge.
Accordingly, as it relates solely to the duty to defend, St. Paul's motion, doc. 33, is DENIED, and the Town and M&N's motions, docs. 32 and 36, are GRANTED. With respect to the indemnification issue, because whether there is a duty to indemnify under the policy will depend on a finding of liability in the underlying action, M&N Materials, Inc. v. Town of Gurley, Alabama, et al., Case No. 5:14-cv-00184-CLS, the issue is premature. Therefore, the court agrees with St. Paul that the court should stay the issue of indemnification. In that respect, the motion to clarify, doc. 48, is GRANTED, and the case is STAYED pending the resolution in M&N Materials, Inc., Case No. 5:14-cv-00184-CLS.