Caserta et al v. Hanover Insurance Group et al, No. 2:2010cv03027 - Document 14 (E.D. La. 2012)

Court Description: ORDER AND REASONS denying 7 Motion to Sever and Proceed Separately by defendant, Massachusetts Bay Insurance Co. Signed by Judge Stanwood R. Duval, Jr on 8/14/2012. (swd)

Download PDF
Caserta et al v. Hanover Insurance Group et al Doc. 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA SALVATORE CASERTA, ET AL. VERSUS CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-3027 HANOVER INSURANCE COMPANYMASSACHUSETTS BAY INSURANCE COMPANY SECTION “K”(2) ORDER AND REASONS Before the Court is a Motion to Sever and Proceed Separately (Doc. 7) filed by defendant Massachusetts Bay Insruance Company (“Mass Bay”). Defendant contends that since this petition concerns five separate and distinct Hurricane Katrina-related insurance claims, the Court should sever these claims. In addition, Mass Bay seeks to reinstate this matter. Procedurally, the proper method for Hanover to have proceeded was to first seek to reopen this matter before seeking a severance. The reason for the stay of this case is still unsettled by virtue of the fact that district courts have applied Taranto v. Louisiana Citizens Property Ins., 62 So.3d 721 (La. 2011), in disparate ways. The issue of Taranto’s application is the subject of two cases, Quinn v. Louisiana citizens Prop. Ins. corp., 12-0152 and Duckworth v. Louisiana Farm Bureau Mur. Ins. Co., 11-2835, which are pending in the Louisiana Supreme Court. Thus, the Court sees no reason to lift the stay. Defendant may re-urge its motion to sever after the Louisiana Supreme Court has rendered an opinion as to the proper application of Taranto. Accordingly, Dockets.Justia.com IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Sever and Proceed Separately (Doc. 7) filed by defendant Massachusetts Bay Insurance Company is DENIED New Orleans, Louisiana, this 14th day of August, 2012. STANWOOD R. DUVAL, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.