Pinnacle Special Police v. Scottsdale Insurance Company, No. 7:2007cv00106 - Document 15 (E.D.N.C. 2009)

Court Description: ORDER granting 11 Motion for Summary Judgment. Defendant Scottsdale Insurance Company's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. To the extent that Pinnacle seeks summary judgment, that request is DENIED. The Clerk is DIRECTED to close this case. Signed by Judge James C. Dever III on 2/12/2009. (Richards, J.) Modified on 2/17/2009 to correct typographical error. (Richards, J.)

Download PDF
Pinnacle Special Police v. Scottsdale Insurance Company Doc. 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA SOUTHERN DIVISION No.7:07-CV-I06-D PINNACLE SPECIAL POLICE, INC., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) SCOTTSDALE INSURANCE COMPANY, ) ) Defendant. ) ORDER Defendant Scottsdale Insurance Company ("Scottsdale") filed a motion for summary judgment in this insurance coverage dispute with plaintiffPinnacle Special Police, Inc. ("Pinnacle"). Pinnacle, through its attorney-in-fact Charleston Premium Finance Company, cancelled Pinnacle's insurance policy with Scottsdale before certain events underlying a tort action involving Pinnacle arose. Thus, Scottsdale contends that it need not defend or indemnify Pinnacle in connection with the underlYing tort action. Pinnacle responds that because Scottsdale failed to provide notice of cancellation to the North Carolina Attorney General and Pinnacle under N.C. Gen Stat. § 74E-3(b), the cancellation was not effective. Scottsdale replies that the notice provision in section 74E-3(b) does not apply when the insured cancels the policy. Because the court agrees with Scottsdale, the court grants Scottsdale's motion for summary judgment. I. Pinnacle is a North Carolina corporation with its principal place ofbusiness in Wilmington, North Carolina. See CompI. 1 I. Pinnacle is a company police agency. See ide 12. Scottsdale is an Ohio corporation with its principal place ofbusiness in Scottsdale, Arizona. See ide 13; Answer 1 3. The court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a), and North Carolina law governs the dispute. Dockets.Justia.com

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.