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.

Acceptance Indemnity Insurance Co. v. Desert Auto Trader LLC

United States District Court, D. Nevada

April 9, 2019

ACCEPTANCE INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff,
v.
DESERT AUTO TRADER LLC; EMMANUEL CESPEDES; LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF ESTATE OF DEANDRE LYLE; LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF ESTATE OF DANNY MIRAMONTES; AND LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF ESTATE OF FRANCISCO MIRAMONTES, Defendants. AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIM.

          RICHARD HARRIS LAW FIRM Mark L. Jackson RICHARD HARRIS LAW FIRM Attorneys for Defendants EMMANUEL CESPEDES, LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF ESTATES OF DEANDRE LYLE, DANNY MIRAMONTES, AND FRANCISCO MIRAMONTES

          RYAN ALEXANDER, CHTD. Ryan Alexander RYAN ALEXANDER, CHTD. Attorney for Defendant and Counterclaimant DESERT AUTO TRADER

          COZEN O'CONNOR Michael W. Melendez COZEN O'CONNOR Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterdefendant ACCEPTANCE INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY]

          Michael W. Melendez COZEN O'CONNOR Attorneys for Plaintiff ACCEPTANCE INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY

          STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO PERMIT PLAINTIFF ACCEPTANCE INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY TO FILE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

          Hon. Carl W. Hoffman United States District Magistrate Judge

         WHEREAS, plaintiff Acceptance Indemnity Insurance Company (“Acceptance”) entered into an auto liability insurance contract with defendant Desert Auto Trader LLC;

         WHEREAS, defendants Emmanuel Cespedes, Legal Representative of Estate of Deandre Lyle, Legal Representative of Danny Miramontes, and Legal Representative of Estate of Francisco Miramontes (collectively, the “Accident Defendants”) have asserted claims against Desert Auto Trader arising from an accident that occurred on or about September 30, 2017;

         WHEREAS, the parties have a dispute regarding the insurance contract's applicable limit regarding the Accident Defendants' claims against Desert Auto Trader;

         WHEREAS, some, but not all, of the Accident Defendants previously made a demand for the insurance contract's limit to settle their claims against Desert Auto Trader;

         WHEREAS, an interpleader claim would be an appropriate vehicle to allow the Accident Defendants to resolve their respective claims to the insurance contract's limit, if payment of that limit would also resolve the Accident Defendants' claims against Desert Auto Trader; WHEREAS, the Accident Defendants currently are unwilling to resolve their claims against Desert Auto Trader for the insurance contract's limit, such that the interpleader claim would not allow resolution of all claims resulting from the accident;

         WHEREAS, the parties wish to proceed before this Court only on the declaratory relief claim and not the interpleader claim;

         WHEREFORE, the parties STIPULATE that Acceptance may file the proposed First Amended Complaint, attached hereto as Exhibit 1, which includes the claim for declaratory relief, but not the claim for interpleader.

         It is ...


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.