Summary
The United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island denied Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration of an order severing and staying their bad-faith insurance claims and related discovery pending resolution of their breach-of-contract claims. The Court concluded that Plaintiffs had not provided sufficient factual information to assess the overlap between contract and bad-faith discovery or otherwise established a basis for reconsideration under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(1).
Holdings
- Reconsideration was denied because Plaintiffs did not provide sufficient factual information to allow the Court to assess the overlap between the breach-of-contract and bad-faith claims or determine whether bad-faith discovery should be permitted.
Questions Presented
- Whether Plaintiffs established grounds under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(1) to reconsider the order severing and staying their bad-faith claims and related discovery.
- Whether the asserted factual overlap, judicial-economy concerns, advanced age of a plaintiff, and Rhode Island's bad-faith statute warranted lifting or reconsidering the severance and stay.
Disposition
writ_denied
Cases Cited (1)
- Wolf v. Geico Ins. Co., 682 F. Supp. 2d 197, 200 (D.R.I. 2010)(applied)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…