Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Sica v. Progressive Direct Insurance Company, 2:16-cv-00513-GMN-VCF. (2017)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20170113d18 Visitors: 9
Filed: Jan. 12, 2017
Latest Update: Jan. 12, 2017
Summary: STIPULATION TO DISMISS EXTRA CONTRACTUAL CLAIMS GLORIA M. NAVARRO , District Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between Plaintiff VINCENT J. SICA, and Defendant PROGRESSIVE DIRECT INSURANCE COMPANY, by and through their respective undersigned counsel of record, that Plaintiff Vincent J. Sica's extra contractual causes of action for (1 bad faith, (2) Defendant Progressive Direct Insurance Company's alleged statutory violations of NRS 686A.310(b) and (3) the prayer for punitiv
More

STIPULATION TO DISMISS EXTRA CONTRACTUAL CLAIMS

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between Plaintiff VINCENT J. SICA, and Defendant PROGRESSIVE DIRECT INSURANCE COMPANY, by and through their respective undersigned counsel of record, that Plaintiff Vincent J. Sica's extra contractual causes of action for (1 bad faith, (2) Defendant Progressive Direct Insurance Company's alleged statutory violations of NRS 686A.310(b) and (3) the prayer for punitive damages are dismisse. The parties further stipulate that Plaintiff Sica may maintain his action for contractual uninsured motorist benefits against Defendant Progressive, though Defendant Progressive retains the right to raise all appropriate defenses to Plaintiff Sica's claim, including but not limited to, the defense that there was no contact between Mr. Sica's motorcycle and the vehicle Mr. Sica alleges hit his motorcycle and fled.

ORDER

Pursuant to the parties' stipulation it is hereby:

ORDERED that Plaintiff Vincent J. Sica's extra contractual causes of action for (1) bad faith, (2) Defendant Progressive Direct Insurance Company's alleged statutory violations of NRS 686A.310(b) and (3) the prayer for punitive damages are dismissed;

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff Sica may maintain his action for contractual uninsured motorist benefits against Defendant Progressive, though Defendant Progressive retains the right to raise all appropriate defenses to Plaintiff Sica's claim, including but not limited to, the defense that there was no contact between Mr. Sica's motorcycle and the vehicle Mr. Sica alleges hit his motorcycle and fled.

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