Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

SCHAEFFER v. GREGORY VILLAGE PARTNERS, L.P., 3:13-CV-04358-JST. (2014)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20140603683 Visitors: 6
Filed: May 08, 2014
Latest Update: May 08, 2014
Summary: SECOND STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT [Local Rule 6-1] JON S. TIGAR, Judge. TO THE COURT AND ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: Plaintiffs Ryan, Anne, and Reese Schaeffer (collectively, the "Plaintiffs"), and defendants the Estate of Kathleen N. Taylor, Deceased, the Estate of Floyd G. Taylor, Deceased, and the Estate of Sam S. Lim, Deceased (only with respect to insurance coverage allegedly issued by Fireman's Fund Insurance Company (collectively, the "
More

SECOND STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT [Local Rule 6-1]

JON S. TIGAR, Judge.

TO THE COURT AND ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

Plaintiffs Ryan, Anne, and Reese Schaeffer (collectively, the "Plaintiffs"), and defendants the Estate of Kathleen N. Taylor, Deceased, the Estate of Floyd G. Taylor, Deceased, and the Estate of Sam S. Lim, Deceased (only with respect to insurance coverage allegedly issued by Fireman's Fund Insurance Company (collectively, the "Estates"), through their respective attorneys, hereby stipulate as follows:

1. Plaintiffs filed this lawsuit on or about June 1, 2011 in the Contra Costa County Superior Court. The matter was removed to this Court on or about September 19, 2013.

2. Pursuant to California Probate Code § 550, et seq., on March 10, 2014 Plaintiffs served Fireman's Fund Insurance Company ("Fireman's Fund") with a summons and the operative complaint on behalf of the Estates.

3. Plaintiffs and Fireman's Fund previously stipulated that Fireman's Fund's response to the operative complaint is due on May 9, 2014. The Court approved that stipulation on April 11, 2014 (see Dkt. No. 75).

4. Fireman's Fund has advised Plaintiffs that it believes it did not issue any insurance policies that could provide coverage for any of the Estates in this case. Fireman's Fund has provided the Plaintiffs with a letter to that effect and documents that Fireman's Fund contends support that belief. Based on this, Fireman's Fund has asked Plaintiffs to withdraw the summons previously served on Fireman's Fund in this case.

5. Fireman's Fund has also served Plaintiffs, on April 9, 2014, with interrogatories and requests for production of all documents supporting any contention by Plaintiffs that Fireman's Fund issued any insurance policies that could provide coverage for any of the Estates in this case. Plaintiffs' responses to Document Request Nos. 1-12 is due on May 26, 2014. Plaintiffs' responses to Document Request No. 13 and the interrogatories are due June 16, 2014.

6. Fireman's Fund and Plaintiffs are currently engaged in meet-and-confer discussions regarding Fireman's Fund's request that Plaintiffs withdraw their summons to Fireman's Fund and Plaintiffs' basis, if any, for contending that Fireman's Fund issued any insurance policies that could provide coverage for any of the Estates in this case. The parties require additional time to complete those meet-and-confer discussions, and agree that a further extension of Fireman's Fund's time to respond to the operative complaint is appropriate while those meet-and-confer discussions continue.

7. Accordingly, Plaintiffs and Fireman's Fund hereby stipulate and agree that Fireman's Fund shall have until June 2, 2014 to file responses to the Complaint on behalf of the Estates, unless Plaintiffs have withdrawn their summons to Fireman's Fund for the Estates before that date.

8. The parties agree that by entering into this stipulation, the Estates do not waive any affirmative or other defenses in this matter, including without limitation the right to assert insufficiency of service of process, lack of personal jurisdiction, lack of subject matter jurisdiction, or the right to challenge the use of Probate Code § 550, et seq. in federal court generally or specifically as to any of the defendants.

STIPULATED AND AGREED:

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer