Allstate Property and Casualty Company v. Wilks, No. 2:2020cv00496 - Document 31 (M.D. Ala. 2021)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER: it is ORDERED that: (1) Plf Allstate Property and Casualty Company's 24 motion for summary judgment is granted as to count I of dft Michael Wilks's 6 counterclaim; That count is dismissed; (2) Dft Wilks may take th e deposition of Ann Slaughter at any time on or before 6/18/2021; (3) Plf Allstate Property and Casualty Company's 24 motion for summary judgment is denied in all other respects, that is, as to its claim for declaratory judgment, but with leav e to renew after the deadline for Slaughter's deposition given above passes; (4) Aside from the exceptions outlined above, the deadlines of the 17 uniform scheduling order otherwise remain in effect. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 6/11/2021. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Appeals Checklist)(bes, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Allstate Property and Casualty Company v. Wilks Doc. 31 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION ALLSTATE PROPERTY AND CASUALTY COMPANY, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL WILKS, Defendant. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:20cv496-MHT (WO) OPINION AND ORDER Defendant Michael Wilks was in a motorcycle crash in September 2018, and he thereafter filed an uninsured motorist claim with plaintiff Allstate Property and Casualty Company under the policy of a relative named See Complaint (Doc. 1) at 2; Answer and Ann Slaughter. Counterclaim (Doc. 6) at 7. current suit against Wilks Allstate then filed the under the Declaratory Judgments Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201, seeking a declaration that Wilks “is not entitled to benefits” under Slaughter’s policy. uninsured motorist Complaint (Doc. 1) Dockets.Justia.com at 1. The court has diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. This suit is now before the court on Allstate’s motion for summary judgment. Allstate seeks summary judgment on its claim for declaratory relief and on count I of Wilks’s counterclaim, in which he seeks “a declaratory indemnify judgment Angela that Marie Hammonds against” her by Wilks. 6) at 7. Allstate must for defend claims and asserted Answer and Counterclaim (Doc. Hammonds was riding a separate motorcycle alongside Wilks at the time of his crash, but she is not a party to this suit. Wilks filed a six-paragraph response to Allstate’s motion, in which he asked Allstate to provide a “signed policy application” related to Slaughter’s policy and requested leave to take Slaughter’s deposition regarding her intent to provide Wilks coverage under her policy. Judgment (Doc. See 26). Response He did 2 to not Motion for address Summary Allstate’s argument for summary judgment on count I of the counterclaim, wherein the company asserted that Wilks had “confus[ed] liability coverage with uninsured motorist coverage in asking that Allstate defend and indemnify Hammonds.” Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 24) then at 13. Wilks filed an untimely amended response to the motion for summary judgment, and he later filed--without Allstate’s Amended reply Response leave brief to to do regarding Plaintiff’s so--a the sur-reply motion. Motion for to See Summary Judgment (Doc. 27); Response to Allstate’s Reply (Doc. 29). Neither of these latter filings meaningfully altered the substance of his response to the motion. “[A] party seeking summary judgment always bears the initial responsibility of informing the district court of the basis for its motion, and identifying those portions of ‘the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any,’ 3 which it believes demonstrate the absence of a genuine issue of material Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323 fact.” (1986). then If the movant meets this initial burden, it becomes incumbent on the non-moving party to “establish that there is a genuine issue of material fact” regarding the claim on which summary judgment has been Matsushita sought. Zenith Radio Corp., Elec. 475 Indus. Co. 574, 587 U.S. Ltd. v. (1986). Alternatively, the non-movant may respond by showing that it lacks opposition, in certain which evidence case the necessary court party time to obtain this evidence. may for allow its that See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(d). Here, Wilks has failed to respond to Allstate’s motion for counterclaim. motion summary for summary When summary judgment materials--including judgment a party judgment, “if the the 4 on fails the count to facts of respond court motion I and may his to a grant supporting considered undisputed--show that the movant is entitled to it.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e)(3). Wilks’s counterclaim It appears to the court that does indeed confuse liability coverage with uninsured motorist coverage, and there are no facts suggesting that Allstate liability coverage to Wilks or Hammonds. provided Allstate’s motion for summary judgment will therefore be granted as to count I of the counterclaim. Wilks has, however, asked to take Slaughter’s deposition before responding to Allstate’s motion for summary judgment on the company’s claim for declaratory judgment. (Doc. 26) See Response to Motion for Summary Judgment at 2. He may already have had the opportunity to do so since filing his response to the motion, as his response was filed in January 2021 but discovery did not close until May 2021. Scheduling Order (Doc. 17) at 3. See Uniform If he has not yet deposed Slaughter, he will be granted leave to do so. In any event, Allstate’s motion for summary judgment on 5 the declaratory leave to judgment renew once claim Wilks will has be denied taken with Slaughter’s deposition and is able to respond substantively to the motion. * * * Accordingly, it is ORDERED that: (1) Plaintiff Company’s granted as motion to Allstate for count counterclaim (Doc. 6). Property summary I of and judgment defendant Casualty (Doc. 24) Michael is Wilks’s That count is dismissed. (2) Defendant Wilks may take the deposition of Ann Slaughter at any time on or before June 18, 2021. (3) Plaintiff Company’s motion Allstate for summary Property judgment and (Doc. Casualty 24) is denied in all other respects, that is, as to its claim for declaratory judgment, but with leave to renew after the deadline for Slaughter’s passes. 6 deposition given above (4) Aside from the exceptions outlined above, the deadlines of the uniform scheduling order (Doc. 17) otherwise remain in effect. DONE, this the 11th day of June, 2021. /s/ Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 7
]]>
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.
