Filed: Feb. 13, 2017
Latest Update: Feb. 13, 2017
Summary: Order Granting Unopposed Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement, Denying All Other Pending Motions As Moot, and Vacating 2/24/17 hearing ECF Nos. 65, 78, 83 JENNIFER A. DORSEY , District Judge . In this coverage dispute, LY, Inc., DBA Residential Service Center moves for a determination that its $5,000 settlement with the plaintiff was entered in good faith, entitling LY to the protections of NRS 17.245. Although A.O. Smith originally opposed the motion, 1 it too has now settle
Summary: Order Granting Unopposed Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement, Denying All Other Pending Motions As Moot, and Vacating 2/24/17 hearing ECF Nos. 65, 78, 83 JENNIFER A. DORSEY , District Judge . In this coverage dispute, LY, Inc., DBA Residential Service Center moves for a determination that its $5,000 settlement with the plaintiff was entered in good faith, entitling LY to the protections of NRS 17.245. Although A.O. Smith originally opposed the motion, 1 it too has now settled..
More
Order Granting Unopposed Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement, Denying All Other Pending Motions As Moot, and Vacating 2/24/17 hearing
ECF Nos. 65, 78, 83
JENNIFER A. DORSEY, District Judge.
In this coverage dispute, LY, Inc., DBA Residential Service Center moves for a determination that its $5,000 settlement with the plaintiff was entered in good faith, entitling LY to the protections of NRS 17.245. Although A.O. Smith originally opposed the motion,1 it too has now settled with Hartford, so it withdrew its opposition,2 leaving this motion for good-faith-settlement determination unopposed. Having reviewed the motion and its exhibits, and finding good cause and that the factors articulated by the Nevada Supreme Court in Velsicol Chemical v. Davidson3 balance in favor of concluding that the LY settlement was entered in good faith, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that LY, Inc.'s Motion for Good Faith Settlement Determination [ECF No. 65] is GRANTED. All claims against LY, Inc. are DISMISSED with prejudice, and the hearing on this motion scheduled for February 24, 2017, is VACATED.
A.O. Smith and Hartford's settlement moots all other pending motions, so I deny them [ECF No. 78, 83] as moot and without prejudice to the parties' ability to refile these motions in the event that the settlement is not completed. A.O. and Hartford have until February 28, 2017, to file a stipulation and order dismissing the remaining claims.
FootNotes
1. See ECF No. 67.
2. ECF No. 85.
3. Velsicol Chemical v. Davidson, 811 P.2d 561, 563 (Nev. 1991).
