Kehagias v. Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company

Background

The plaintiff’s counsel sent the court a letter asking it to modify an October 4, 2023 order. That earlier order directed the plaintiff to file a “Redlined document comparing the Complaint to the proposed Amended Complaint.” A redlined document is a version showing changes between two documents.

Request

The plaintiff asked for permission to file an alternative statement identifying categories of changes and the paragraphs affected, rather than a redlined version. Alternatively, counsel asked for additional time to file the amended complaint with revisions that would make preparing the comparison easier. The request sought five additional days, until October 11, 2023. Counsel stated that opposing counsel had no objection to the extension.

Reasons Given

Counsel described the proposed amendments as non-substantive. According to the letter, the changes included correcting typographical errors, revising allegations based on information from insurance policies and other documents, clarifying the claims, addressing the case’s separation from an underlying state-court case, adding 41 paragraphs, changing the order of many paragraphs, clarifying the parties for subject-matter-jurisdiction purposes, and adding four exhibits. The exhibits included three insurance policies and a reservation-of-rights or partial-denial-of-coverage letter from Philadelphia.

Disposition

The document bears an “SO ORDERED” notation dated October 5, 2023. However, the provided text does not clearly reveal the court’s specific ruling on the requested alternative filing, the requested extension, or both. It therefore does not establish whether Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. granted, denied, or otherwise modified the request. The filing concerns case-management and amendment procedures, not the merits of the insurance dispute.