Platte River Insurance Company v. Dignity Health
Filing
23
STIPULATION AND ORDER re STAY OF ACTION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER filed by Mercy General Hospital, Dignity Health Case Management Statement due by 11/9/2012. Case Management Conference reset for 11/16/2012 09:00 AM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco.. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 8/16/12. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/16/2012)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP
BARRY S. LANDSBERG (Bar No. CA 117284)
E-mail: blandsberg@manatt.com
SUSAN PAGE WHITE (Bar No. CA 137125)
E-mail: spwhite@manatt.com
11355 West Olympic Boulevard
Los Angeles, CA 90064-1614
Telephone: (310) 312-4000
Facsimile: (310) 312-4224
MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP
AMY B. BRIGGS (Bar No. CA 194028)
E-mail: abriggs@manatt.com
AMANDA M. KNUDSEN (Bar No. CA 252752)
E-mail: aknudsen@manatt.com
One Embarcadero Center, 30th Floor
Telephone: (415) 291-7400
Facsimile: (415) 291-7474
Attorneys for Defendant
DIGNITY HEALTH f/k/a Catholic Healthcare
West d/b/a Mercy General Hospital
14
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
15
16
17
PLATTE RIVER INSURANCE
COMPANY,
Plaintiff,
18
19
20
21
22
23
vs.
DIGNITY HEALTH f/k/a
CATHOLIC HEALTHCARE WEST
d/b/a MERCY GENERAL
HOSPITAL,
Case No. CV 12-2356 EMC
JOINT STIPULATION REGARDING
STAY OF ACTION AND
[PROPOSED] ORDER ; ORDER SETTING
CMC
[Civil Local Rule 7-12]
Defendants.
24
25
26
27
28
M ANATT , P HELPS &
P HILLIPS , LLP
ATTO RNEY S AT LAW
SAN FRA NCI SCO
JOINT STIPULATION TO STAY ACTION AND ORDER THEREON
1
2
ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY,
Plaintiff,
3
4
5
6
7
8
Case No. CV 12-2369 EMC
vs.
DIGNITY HEALTH f/k/a
CATHOLIC HEALTHCARE WEST
d/b/a MERCY GENERAL
HOSPITAL,
Defendants.
9
WHEREAS, on May 9, 2012, Plaintiff Platte River Insurance Company
10
(“Platte River”) filed a Complaint against Defendant Dignity Health formerly
11
12
13
known as Catholic Healthcare West d/b/a Mercy General Hospital (“Dignity”) in
Case No. 3:12-cv-02365 EMC (the “Platte River action”);
WHEREAS, on May 10, 2012, Plaintiff Arch Insurance Company (“Arch”)
14
15
16
17
(collectively with Platte River, “Plaintiffs”) filed a Complaint against Dignity in
Case No. 3:12-cv-02369 EMC (the “Arch action”);
WHEREAS, on June 15, 2012, the Platte River action and the Arch action
18
were deemed related and both are now assigned to Judge Edward M. Chen
19
(collectively the Platte River/Arch action”);
20
WHEREAS, the Platte River/Arch action relates to insurance coverage for
21
the underlying wrongful termination lawsuit against Dignity, entitled Chopourian v.
22
Catholic Healthcare West, et al., United States District Court, Eastern District of
23
California, Case No. 2:09-cv-02972-KJM-KJN (the “Chopourian lawsuit”);
24
25
26
WHEREAS, Platte River issued an excess policy to Dignity with a
$10,000,000 limit of liability in excess of $10,000,000 (“the Platte River Policy”),
subject to all of the Platte River Policy’s terms, conditions, limitations, exclusions,
27
28
and endorsements;
M ANATT , P HELPS &
P HILLIPS , LLP
2
ATTO RNEY S AT LAW
JOINT STIPULATION TO STAY ACTION AND ORDER THEREON
SAN FRA NCI SCO
1
WHEREAS, Arch issued an excess policy to Dignity with a $10,000,000
2
limit of liability in excess of $20,000,000 (“the Arch Policy”), subject to all of the
3
Arch Policy’s terms, conditions, limitations, exclusions, and endorsements;
4
5
6
7
WHEREAS, on February 29, 2012, a jury verdict was entered in the
Chopourian lawsuit against Dignity;
WHEREAS, on April 30, 2012, Judge Kimberly J. Mueller reduced the
initial jury verdict to approximately $82 million and entered judgment in the
8
9
10
Chopourian lawsuit accordingly (“the Judgment”);
WHEREAS, on May 29, 2012, Dignity challenged the Judgment and filed a
11
(1) Motion for a New Trial or Damages Remittitur, and (2) Motion for Partial
12
Judgment as a Matter of Law in the Chopourian lawsuit, both of which seek to
13
overturn and/or further reduce the Judgment;
14
WHEREAS, these motions are scheduled to be heard on September 28, 2012;
15
WHEREAS, if the above-described post-trial motions do not result in full
16
and complete relief to Dignity, Dignity represents that it will appeal the Judgment
17
in the Chopourian lawsuit to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals;
18
19
20
WHEREAS, Dignity currently anticipates that the Ninth Circuit is not likely
to render a decision on any appeal until mid-2014, at the earliest (and resolution at
that time would occur only if, for instance, the Ninth Circuit did not remand the
21
22
23
Chopourian lawsuit for a new trial);
WHEREAS, the amount of any judgment owing by Dignity in the
24
Chopourian lawsuit has yet to be fully resolved and ultimately may never reach the
25
Platte River Policy or the Arch Policy;
26
27
WHEREAS, Plaintiffs and Dignity agree at this time to a stay of the Platte
River/Arch action pending complete and final resolution of the Chopourian lawsuit
28
M ANATT , P HELPS &
P HILLIPS , LLP
3
ATTO RNEY S AT LAW
JOINT STIPULATION TO STAY ACTION AND ORDER THEREON
SAN FRA NCI SCO
1
to avoid incurring substantial time and expense litigating coverage issues that may
2
become moot because the Platte River Policy and the Arch Policy may never be
3
triggered;
4
5
6
7
WHEREAS, notwithstanding Plaintiffs’ and Dignity’s agreement at this time
to a stay of the Platte River/Arch action, Plaintiffs and Dignity reserve their
respective rights to request at anytime, upon providing 30 days’ written notice, that
the Court lift the stay;
8
9
10
11
WHEREAS, Plaintiffs and Dignity may also request that the stay be lifted by
filing a stipulation with the Court;
WHEREAS, Dignity contends that there is legal authority for this Court to
12
stay the Platte River/Arch action pending resolution of the Chopourian lawsuit (see,
13
inter alia, Montrose Chem. Corp. v. Superior Court, 6 Cal. 4th 287, 301-02 (1993);
14
Montrose Chem. Corp. v. Superior Court, 25 Cal. App. 4th 902, 907-11 (1994);
15
Haskel Inc. v. Superior Court, 33 Cal. App. 4th 963, 979 (1995); David Kleis, Inc.
16
v. Superior Court, 37 Cal. App. 4th 1035, 1051 (1995); U.S. Const. article III, § 2,
17
cl. 1 (case or controversy requirement); 28 U.S.C. § 2201 (requiring case “of actual
18
19
20
controversy”));
WHEREAS, Dignity contends that this Court has the discretion to stay the
proceedings before it (see Landis v. North American Co., 299 U.S. 245, 248 (1936)
21
22
23
24
25
and CMAX, Inc. v. Hall, 300 F.2d 265, 268 (9th Cir. 1962) (district court has
inherent power to control proceedings to promote economy of time and effort for
itself, for counsel, and for litigants)); and
WHEREAS, under the circumstances, Plaintiffs and Dignity agree at this
26
time to a stay of the Platte River/Arch action pending resolution of the Chopourian
27
lawsuit.
28
M ANATT , P HELPS &
P HILLIPS , LLP
4
ATTO RNEY S AT LAW
JOINT STIPULATION TO STAY ACTION AND ORDER THEREON
SAN FRA NCI SCO
STIPULATION
1
2
3
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS STIPULATED by and between Plaintiffs and
Dignity, through their counsel of record, that:
4
5
6
7
1.
Upon entry of an order of this Court approving this stipulation, the
Platte River/Arch action shall be stayed until a further order of the Court lifting any
such stay. All pretrial deadlines, including the discovery cut-off date and disclosure
of expert witnesses, will be determined by the re-set trial date;
8
2.
10
The parties also may request that the stay be lifted by filing a
stay;
11
12
Upon 30-days’ notice, any party may file a motion seeking to lift the
3.
9
stipulation with the Court;
4.
13
This stipulation is without prejudice to the rights of any party to seek a
14
further stay of this coverage action or to oppose any motion seeking to lift the stay;
15
and
16
17
5.
By entering into this stipulation, the parties do not waive any claims or
defenses whatsoever.
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
M ANATT , P HELPS &
P HILLIPS , LLP
5
ATTO RNEY S AT LAW
JOINT STIPULATION TO STAY ACTION AND ORDER THEREON
SAN FRA NCI SCO
1
2
Dated: August 14, 2012
TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP
3
BY:
4
5
6
7
Dated: August 14, 2012
/s/ Terrence R. McInnis
Terrence R. McInnis
Attorneys for Plaintiff
PLATTE RIVER INSURANCE
COMPANY
SEDGWICK LLP
8
BY:
9
10
11
12
Dated: August 14, 2012
/s/ Nicholas Boos ________
Nicholas Boos
Attorneys for Plaintiff
ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY
MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
BY:
/s/ Amanda M. Knudsen
Amanda M. Knudsen
Attorneys for Defendant
DIGNITY HEALTH f/k/a Catholic
Healthcare West d/b/a Mercy General
Hospital
Filer’s Attestation: Pursuant to General Order No. 45, Section X(B) regarding
signatures, Amanda M. Knudsen hereby attests that concurrence in the filing of this
document has been obtained.
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
M ANATT , P HELPS &
P HILLIPS , LLP
6
ATTO RNEY S AT LAW
JOINT STIPULATION TO STAY ACTION AND ORDER THEREON
SAN FRA NCI SCO
ORDER
1
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
from 9/14/12 to 11/16/12 at 9:00 a.m. A joint CMC Statement shall be filed by 11/9/12.
UNIT
ED
7
8
DERE
SO OR ED
IT IS
DIFI
AS MO
NO
9
RT
ER
11
N
F
D IS T IC T O
R
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
M ANATT , P HELPS &
P HILLIPS , LLP
7
ATTO RNEY S AT LAW
JOINT STIPULATION TO STAY ACTION AND ORDER THEREON
SAN FRA NCI SCO
n
M. Che
H
10
dward
Judge E
R NIA
Judge of the United States D
District Court
FO
By:
S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA
RT
U
O
6
16
Dated: August ___, 2012
S
4
5
The CMC is reset
LI
3
A
2
C
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
