Filed: May 11, 2012
Latest Update: May 11, 2012
Summary: ORDER ROBERT C. JONES, District Judge. This case arises out of injuries sustained by non-parties from a falling tree branch and the question of an insurance company's duty to defend or indemnify five Defendants in the resulting state court tort action. The Court has granted a motion for offensive summary judgment against all Defendants, as well as Plaintiff's motion for default judgment against Defendant Greater Pershing Partnership. The Court also granted Plaintiff's motion to amend the judgm
Summary: ORDER ROBERT C. JONES, District Judge. This case arises out of injuries sustained by non-parties from a falling tree branch and the question of an insurance company's duty to defend or indemnify five Defendants in the resulting state court tort action. The Court has granted a motion for offensive summary judgment against all Defendants, as well as Plaintiff's motion for default judgment against Defendant Greater Pershing Partnership. The Court also granted Plaintiff's motion to amend the judgme..
More
ORDER
ROBERT C. JONES, District Judge.
This case arises out of injuries sustained by non-parties from a falling tree branch and the question of an insurance company's duty to defend or indemnify five Defendants in the resulting state court tort action. The Court has granted a motion for offensive summary judgment against all Defendants, as well as Plaintiff's motion for default judgment against Defendant Greater Pershing Partnership. The Court also granted Plaintiff's motion to amend the judgment to include a declaration that it owed no duty to defend or indemnify certain alleged insureds in the underlying state court suit. Plaintiff has now asked the Court to further amend the judgment to state that it had no duty to defend or indemnify Greater Pershing Partnership, as well. The Court grants the motion.
CONCLUSION
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion to Correct Judgment (ECF No. 38) is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall amend the Judgment to include the following language:
1. Pershing County, Roger Mancebo, Dave Ayoob, and Darin Bloyd are not insureds under the written insurance contract between The Burlington Insurance Company and Greater Pershing Partnership, number 011B005866, effective December 1, 2007 to December 1, 2008.
2. The Burlington Insurance Company never had, and does not now have, any duty to defend Pershing County, Roger Mancebo, Dave Ayoob, Darin Bloyd, and/or Greater Pershing Partnership in the action entitled Virginia Rose and Kirsten Hertz v. Pershing County et. al. in the Sixth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada for Pershing County, Case No. CV09-10800.
3. The Burlington Insurance Company does not have, and never will have, any duty to indemnify Pershing County, Roger Mancebo, Dave Ayoob, Darin Bloyd, and/or Greater Pershing Partnership in connection with the action entitled Virginia Rose and Kirsten Hertz v. Pershing County et. al. in the Sixth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada for Pershing County, Case No. CV09-10800.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the hearing set for ECF No. 38 on June 21, 2012 is VACATED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
