Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 10, 2021

Steadfast Insurance Company v. Portsmouth JV

Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Docket
1:20-cv-08615
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Motion to DismissCivil ProcedureInsurance
In one sentence

In Steadfast Insurance v. Portsmouth JV, Judge Abrams granted Steadfast’s dismissal request on fees but denied it on Portsmouth JV’s bad-faith counterclaim.

Who this affects

Steadfast Insurance Company and Portsmouth JV, concerning Portsmouth JV’s attorneys’-fees request and bad-faith counterclaim.

What happened

In Steadfast Insurance Company v. Portsmouth JV, Steadfast asked the court to dismiss parts of Portsmouth JV’s counterclaim.

The court granted the motion regarding Portsmouth JV’s pursuit of attorneys’ fees under Mighty Midgets, Inc. v. Centennial Insurance Co. It denied the motion regarding Portsmouth JV’s counterclaim alleging bad faith.

Judge Ronnie Abrams set deadlines for Steadfast’s answer, a status update about discovery and settlement, and briefing on Portsmouth JV’s summary-judgment motion. The clerk was directed to terminate the motion.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Steadfast Insurance Company v. Portsmouth JV · No. 1:20-cv-08615
Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Date
Sept. 10, 2021

Ruling

The court ruled on Steadfast Insurance Company’s motion to dismiss, Dkt. 16. It granted the motion with respect to Portsmouth JV’s pursuit of attorneys’ fees under Mighty Midgets, Inc. v. Centennial Ins. Co., 47 N.Y.2d 12 (1979). It denied the motion with respect to Portsmouth JV’s counterclaim alleging bad faith.

Next Steps

The court adopted the parties’ proposed schedule. Steadfast’s answer to Portsmouth JV’s counterclaim was due September 24, 2021. Within fourteen days after service of the answer, the parties were required to meet and confer and file a status update stating whether additional discovery was needed and proposing a discovery schedule. They were also directed to state whether the court could assist with settlement, including through a settlement conference with Magistrate Judge Freeman or the district’s mediation program.

The court adopted the proposed briefing schedule for Portsmouth JV’s motion for summary judgment. Steadfast’s opposition was due September 27, 2021, and Portsmouth JV’s reply was due October 11, 2021. The parties could propose a different schedule in light of the ruling. The clerk was directed to terminate the motion pending at Dkt. 16.

Basis Given in the Order

The order states that the reasons for the ruling were given on the record at the previous day’s conference. Those reasons are not included in the written order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.