Schnitzer Steel Industries, Inc. et al v. Continental Casualty Company et al, No. 3:2010cv01174 - Document 87 (D. Or. 2011)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER: Adopting Magistrate Judge Papak's Findings and Recommendation 54 . Signed on 11/29/11 by Judge Malcolm F. Marsh. (cib)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON ."' Portland Division SCHNITZER an Oregon SCHNITZER an Oregon STEEL INDUSTRIES, INC., corporation; and INVESTMENT CORP., corporation, 3:10-CV-1l74-PK OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiffs, v. CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY, an Illinois corporation; and TRANSPORTATION INSURANCE COMPANY, an Illinois corporation, Defendants. REDDEN, Judge: On August 3, 2011, Magistrate Judge Papak i sued a Findings and Recommendation (doc. 54) in which he ded that the court (1) grant plaintiffs' Motion w;lgment o.n the Pleadings (doc. 15). for Partial Plaintiffs and defendants have each filed timely objections to the Findings and Recommendation. 1 - OPINION AND ORDER The district court must make a de novo dete mination of any endation as·to portion of a magistrate judge's Finding and which any party has objected. United See 28 U.S.C. § States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9 th Cir. 2003) (en banc) . DISCUSSION By December 2000, plaintiffs had been notiffl'ed by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Oregon D partment of Environmental Quality that they were potentially responsible parties liable for costs incurred in remediating contamination at the Portland Harbor Superfund Site. From January 1977 to October 1983, defendants issued annual comprehensive general liability insurance policies to plaintiffs insuring them against certain liabilities arisin~ from property damage occurring during the respective policy perl iods that were neither expected nor intended from plaintiffs' sandpoint. The I policies included provisions requiring defendants to defend plaintiffs in actions brought against them related to those potential liabilities until the limits of the applicable policies had been exhausted by payments or judgments. Plaintiffs allege defendants have breached he terms of the policies by not reimbursing them in a timely man er for all the reasonable attorneys fees and defense costs they have incurred and are entitled to under the policies issued by defendants. 2 - OPINION AND ORDER Magistrate Judge Papak recommended the cour declare as follows: [I]n light of defendants' conceded cur ent obligation to undertake Schnitzer's de ense in connection with the Portland Harbor Superfund matter, defendants (i) are j intly and severally liable to pay the full aciount of Schnitzer's reasonable and necessary defense costs, and (ii) must make a reasonably prompt determination and payment of the reasonable and necessary fees, costs and expenses incurred by Schnitzer. Findings and Recommendation, at 13. Magistrate Judge Papak also recommended that the court's declaration be subj~ct to six "caveats," which amount to guidelines or "qualifiers" formulated by the court for the purpose of assisting the parties in their future dealings regarding defendants' obligation to pay defense plaintiffs' defense costs. Each of the parties objects to one or more, but not all of the caveats, in part based on their magistrate judge's findings. character~zations of the The Court has reviJwed the record de novo and concludes the Magistrate Judge Papak's caveats, as set forth in his Findings and Recommendation, are both clear and reasonable, and provide appropriate guidance to the parties regarding plaintiffs' rights and defendants' obl'gations relating to defense costs under the terms of the insuranc issue. 3 They do not require further clarificatio - OPINION AND ORDER policies at Accordingly, the court ADOPTS Magistrate Ju ge Papak's Findings and Recommendation (doc. 54) in their e tirety. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this day of November, 2011. ames A. Redden Senior United Stat s District Judge 4 - OPINION AND ORDER

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.