Boehm et al v. Zimprich et al, No. 3:2014cv00016 - Document 93 (W.D. Wis. 2014)

Court Description: OPINION & ORDER granting 90 Acuity, a mutual insurance company's Motion to Intervene, with the proviso that ACUITY's role will be to participate in the framing of the verdict form. ACUITY will not be allowed to conduct discovery, or otherwise participate in the litigation without specific advance approval of the court. Signed by District Judge James D. Peterson on 10/2/14. (jat)

Download PDF
Boehm et al v. Zimprich et al Doc. 93 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN SCOTT BOEHM and DAVID STLUKA, Plaintiffs, OPINION & ORDER v. 14-cv-16-jdp DAN ZIMPRICH; CIARA ZIMPRICH; LEGENDS OF THE FIELD, LLC; SPORTS PLUS, LLC; GAMEDAY SPORTS; and RICHARD MONCHER; Defendants, and AMERICAL FAMILY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY; and ACUITY, A MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Intervening Defendants. ACUITY, A Mutual Insurance Company, has filed a motion to intervene under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24, seeking to participate in the action to obtain a post-verdict judicial determination regarding its duty to indemnify defendant Sports Plus, LLC. Defense of this matter was tendered to ACUITY more than 60 days ago, and ACUITY s delay at this late stage of the proceedings would ordinarily militate strongly against allowing intervention. But ACUITY assures the court that it is not seeking to delay the proceedings by seeking bifurcation or a stay. ACUITY asks only for the opportunity to participate in framing the special verdict to facilitate the coverage determination which it will present post-verdict. Because the motion is unopposed and ACUITY s limited participation would not derail the case, the court will grant its motion to intervene, with the proviso that ACUITY s role will be to participate in the framing of the verdict form. ACUITY will not be allowed to conduct Dockets.Justia.com discovery, or otherwise participate the litigation without specific advance approval of the court. Entered this 2nd day of October, 2014. BY THE COURT: /s/ JAMES D. PETERSON District Judge 2

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.