Gibbs v. Secura Insurance Company

Background

Secura Insurance Company moved to amend the pretrial scheduling order and clarify the fact issues for trial. The court considered whether there was “good cause” to modify the schedule under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4). Good cause generally depends primarily on the moving party’s diligence, but may also be shown by newly discovered facts or another significant changed circumstance.

Reasons for the Ruling

The court identified two newly discovered facts. First, Secura had reasonably expected Jeff Gibbs and Christine Gibbs to file a motion seeking to vacate the appraisal award, but they did not do so, despite subpoenaing documents from and deposing members of the appraisal panel. Second, after the June 30, 2026 dispositive-motion deadline, the Gibbs disclosed that they would challenge the reasonableness of the insurance policy’s 365-day deadline for completing all property repairs required to collect the full repair cost. Because that issue had not been disclosed earlier, the parties had not conducted discovery about it, and Secura did not know the extent of the repairs made on the property.

The court found that Secura acted quickly and diligently after learning these facts. It concluded that good cause existed to amend the scheduling order so Secura could file a dispositive motion addressing the remaining issue in the case.

Order

Judge Shannon G. Elkins ordered the following:

- Secura’s Motion to Amend the Scheduling Order and to Clarify What Fact Issues Exist for Trial, Docket 84, was GRANTED. - Secura’s second motion seeking the same relief, Docket 90, was DENIED AS MOOT. - The dispositive-motion deadline was extended to October 13, 2026, for Secura only.

The order addressed scheduling and the opportunity to file a dispositive motion; it did not decide the underlying insurance dispute.