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.

American Automobile Insurance Co. v. Hawaii Nut & Bolt, Inc.

United States District Court, D. Hawaii

February 16, 2017

AMERICAN AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY; NATIONAL SURETY CORPORATION, Plaintiffs/ Counterclaim Defendants,
v.
HAWAII NUT & BOLT, INC.; SAFEWAY, INC., Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs, and DOUGLAS MOORE; MONARCH INSURANCE SERVICES, INC.; INSURANCE ASSOCIATES, INC., Additional Counterclaim Defendants.

         ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS/ COUNTERCLAIM DEFENDANTS AMERICAN AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY AND NATIONAL SURETY CORPORATION'S MOTION FOR AN ORDER COMPELLING PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS BY SAFEWAY, INC. AND HAWAII NUT & BOLT, INC.

          Kevin S.C. Chang United States Magistrate Judge.

         Before the Court is Plaintiffs/Counterclaim Defendants American Automobile Insurance Company and National Surety Corporation's (collectively “Fireman's Fund” or “FF”) Motion for an Order Compelling Production of Documents by Safeway, Inc. and Hawaii Nut & Bolt, filed December 14, 2016. Defendants Safeway, Inc. (“Safeway”) and Hawaii Nut & Bolt, Inc. (“HNB”) (collectively “Defendants”) filed an Opposition on January 23, 2017.[1] On January 30, 2017, FF filed its Reply.

         This matter came on for hearing on February 13, 2017. Stuart Fujioka, Esq., appeared, and Steven Allison, Esq., appeared by phone on behalf of FF. Judith Pavey, Esq., and Maile Miller, Esq., appeared on behalf of Defendants. Corlis Chang, Esq., appeared on behalf of Insurance Associates, Inc. and Douglas Moore, and Kenneth Robbins, Esq., Donna Marron, Esq., and Sasha Hamada, Esq., appeared on behalf of Douglas Moore and Monarch Insurance Services, Inc. After careful consideration of the parties' submissions, the applicable law, and the arguments presented at the hearing, the Court HEREBY GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART the Motion for the reasons set forth below.

         BACKGROUND

         As the Court and the parties are well-acquainted with the facts and procedural history of this case, the Court includes only those facts pertinent to the disposition of the instant Motion.

         On August 19, 2016, FF served Defendants with requests for production of documents (“RPOD”) related to the mediation, settlement, and resulting stipulated judgment. The following RPOD are the subject of the Motion:

         Safeway

• Request 7: All documents regarding any assignment of the policies by HNB to Safeway; • Request 37: All communications between Safeway and any person regarding any mediation or settlement conference in the underlying action;
• Request 38: All communications between Safeway and any person regarding any mediation or settlement conference in this action;
• Request 39: All communications between Safeway and any person regarding settlement or potential settlement in the underlying action;
• Request 40: All documents regarding the negotiation of the stipulated judgment;
• Request 41: All communications between Safeway and any person regarding the Settlement Agreement in the Underlying Action;
• Request 42: All communications between Safeway and any person regarding the stipulated judgment in the underlying action;
• Request 43: All documents regarding any settlement demands Safeway made in the underlying action;
• Request 44: All documents regarding any settlement offers Safeway received in ...

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.