Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Evanston Insurance Co. v. 70 Limited Partnership

United States District Court, D. Nevada

November 14, 2017

EVANSTON INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiffs,
v.
70 LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a Nevada L.P.; TERTIA DVORCHAK, as Special Administratrix of the Estate of Thomas T. Beam, Deceased; JOHN PETER LEE, LT and JOHN PETER Third-Party Plaintiff,
v.
AGENCY Y IN Ec., HARMON INSURANCE Third-Party Defendant.

          GEORGE D. YARON Nevada Bar No. 7959 YARON & ASSOCIATES, TODD L. MOODY Nevada Bar No. 5430 HUTCHISON & STEFFEN ATTORNEYS Attorneys for Defendants, Counter-Claimants, and Third-Party Plaintiffs

          JOHN PETER LEE, LTD., and the ESTATE OF JOHN PETER LEE

          ORDER

         This matter was stayed effective December 5, 2014, when Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe issued an Order staying this action pending the resolution of the malpractice lawsuit, entitled 70 Limited Partnership, et al. v. John Peter Lee, Ltd., District, State of Nevada, Clark County (“Malpractice action”).

         The Malpractice action involved allegations of attorney malpractice by John Peter Lee, Ltd., and John Peter Lee in connection with their work on an inverse condemnation case, captioned 70 Limited Partnership, et al. v. McCarron International Airport and Clark County, Clark County District Court, Case no A572739 (“McCarron action”). Moreover, the case, captioned F &C Collections, Inc. and John Peter Lee, Ltd., v. Estate of Thomas T. Beam, Jimma Lee Beam Revocable Trust, 70 Limited, LLC, Leigh, T&D, Inc., Jimma Lee Beam (deceased), Tertia Dvorchak and Bank of Nevada, Clark County District Court, Case No. A-13-680570-B (“Collection action”), began when John Peter Lee, Ltd., sought to recover the fees/costs earned prosecuting the McCarron action. The Malpractice action was filed after the Collection action approximately seven and one-half months later. On or about April 25, 2014, the Malpractice action was consolidated with the Collection action.

         A settlement was reached in the Collection action, and Malpractice action was dismissed. In light of these developments, the parties requested the Court lift the stay. The Court lifted the Stay effective August 17, 2017, and ordered the parties to file a proposed Scheduling Order by August 24, 2017.

         This matter involves six parties. These parties are: (1) Evanston Insurance Company, (2) 70 Limited Partnership, (3) Tertia Dvorchak, (4) John Peter Lee, LTD., (5) the Estate of John Peter Lee, and (6) Harley E. Harmon Insurance Agency, Inc. Evanston Insurance Company, is the professional liability insurer of the deceased John Peter Lee and Mr. Lee's law firm - John Peter Lee, Ltd. Mr. Lee passed away during the time that this matter was stayed. 70 Limited Partnership and Tertia Dvorchak brought the Malpractice action against Mr. Lee and John Peter Lee, Ltd. The Estate of John Peter Lee and John Peter Lee, Ltd., filed a Third-Party Complaint against John Peter Lee, Ltd.'s insurance broker, Harley E. Harmon Insurance Agency, Inc., for claims related to the Malpractice action.

         In the second half of August of 2017, the parties commenced settlement discussions. The parties requested that the deadline for filing a proposed Scheduling Order be extended from August 24, 2017 to September 6, 2017, so that the parties would have time to continue their settlement discussions. The Court granted the request and signed the Stipulation. Thereafter, the parties made a second request that the deadline for filing a proposed Scheduling Order be extended from September 6, 2017 to September 13, 2017, for the parties to continue their settlement discussions. The Court granted the request and signed the Stipulation. Moreover, on September 13, 2017, the parties made a third request that the deadline for filing a proposed Scheduling Order be extended from September 13, 2017 to September 22, 2017, for the parties to continue their settlement discussions. The parties then made a Fourth Request that the deadline for filing a proposed Scheduling Order be extended from September 22, 2017 to October 13, 2017, for the parties to continue their settlement discussions. The Court granted the request and signed the Stipulation.

         Thereafter, the parties stipulated (1) to continue the deadline for filing a proposed Scheduling Order until November 15, 2017, or, in the alternative, (2) to withdraw the deadline for filing a proposed Scheduling Order, and agree to provide the Court with a written update on the status of the dismissal of the action by November 15, 2017, if the entire lawsuit was not dismissed by that date. The Court granted the request and signed the Stipulation.

         At this point, all of the claims have been tentatively settled. The parties are working on finalizing a written settlement agreement. Once the written settlement agreement has been finalized and settlement checks exchanged, then the parties will file a Stipulation of Dismissal.

         The parties hereby stipulate (1) to continue the deadline for filing a proposed Scheduling Order until December 15, 2017, or, in the alternative, (2) to withdraw the deadline for filing a proposed Scheduling Order, and agree to provide the Court with a written update on the status of the dismissal of ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.