PAR ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS, INC. v. BLUELINE RENTAL LLC

No. 2:16-CV-0246-TOR.

PAR ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS, INC. and OLD REPUBLIC INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. BLUELINE RENTAL LLC; PLATINUM EQUITY, LLC; and SANDRA HOYE, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Conor J. Finnerty, and for C.F., a Minor and M.F., a Minor, Defendants.

United States District Court, E.D. Washington.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Cause: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity - Declaratory Judgement
Nature of Suit: 110 Insurance
Source: PACER


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

PAR Electrical Contractors Inc, Plaintiff, represented by Eliot M. Harris , Williams Kastner & Gibbs.

Old Republic Insurance Company, Plaintiff, represented by Eliot M. Harris , Williams Kastner & Gibbs.

Blue Line Rental LLC, Defendant, represented by Bruce A. Winchell , Mills Meyers Swartling, Caryn Geraghty Jorgensen , Mills Meyers Swartling, John Thomas Fetters , Mills Meyers Swartling, Aaron T. Martin , Snell & Wilmer LLP, pro hac vice, Patrick X. Fowler , Snell & Wilmer LLP, pro hac vice, Raymond S. Weber , Mills Meyers Swartling & Robert Kethcart , Snell & Wilmer LLP, pro hac vice.

Platinum Equity LLC, Defendant, represented by Bruce A. Winchell , Mills Meyers Swartling, Caryn Geraghty Jorgensen , Mills Meyers Swartling, John Thomas Fetters , Mills Meyers Swartling, Aaron T. Martin , Snell & Wilmer LLP, pro hac vice, Patrick X. Fowler , Snell & Wilmer LLP, pro hac vice & Robert Kethcart , Snell & Wilmer LLP, pro hac vice.

Sandra Hoye, Defendant, represented by Simon Henri Forgette , Simon H Forgette PS.

Blue Line Rental LLC, Counter Claimant, represented by Bruce A. Winchell , Mills Meyers Swartling, Caryn Geraghty Jorgensen , Mills Meyers Swartling & John Thomas Fetters , Mills Meyers Swartling.

Old Republic Insurance Company, Counter Defendant, represented by Eliot M. Harris , Williams Kastner & Gibbs.

PAR Electrical Contractors Inc, Counter Defendant, represented by Eliot M. Harris , Williams Kastner & Gibbs.


ORDER DENYING OLD REPUBLIC INSURANCE COMPANY'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

THOMAS O. RICE, Chief District Judge.

BEFORE THE COURT is Old Republic Insurance Company's Motion for Reconsideration (ECF No. 51). The Court has reviewed the record and files herein, and is fully informed. The Motion for Reconsideration (ECF No. 51) is DENIED, as Old Republic's request simply rehashes arguments that were fully considered. Compare ECF No. 51 with ECF No. 47.

DISCUSSION

"[A] motion for reconsideration should not be granted, absent highly unusual circumstances, unless the district court is presented with newly discovered evidence, committed clear error, or if there is an intervening change in the controlling law." 389 Orange St. Partners v. Arnold, 179 F.3d 656, 665 (9th Cir. 1999) (citation omitted). There is no newly discovered evidence or change in law. Old Republic has not stated how the Court committed clear error. ECF No. 51. Old Republic merely complains about the result and attempts to re-litigate the issues this Court already decided after thorough analysis.1 Compare ECF No. 51 with ECF No. 47. Old Republic's concern that the Court should wait to determine whether Old Republic has a duty to indemnify until a verdict is illusory—if there is no resulting liability the duty to indemnify does not materialize.

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

Old Republic's Motion for Reconsideration (ECF No. 25) is DENIED.

The District Court Executive is hereby directed to enter this Order and provide copies to counsel.

FootNotes


1. Old Republic complains that this Court did not follow Ritter v. Penske Trucking Leasing Co., an unpublished case. ECF No. 51 at 2. The Ritter case does not even directly address the issue—rather, it focuses on a lack of an allegation in the underlying complaint and reasonable expectations—and its conclusion that the policy was limited to negligence was not explained or supported, contrary to the cases this Court references in its Order (ECF NO. 47). Ritter v. Penske Trucking Leasing Co., L.P., 2012 WL 6049186, at 4-6 (Wisc. App. 2012).

Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases