Raymond Tarlton, as guardian ad litem for Henry Lee McCollum, et al. v. Leroy Allen, et al.

No. 5:15-CV-451-BO · United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, Western Division · March 9, 2026 · No. No. 5:15-CV-451-BO

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina ruled on motions to strike, compel discovery, and obtain judgment on the pleadings in litigation involving insurance coverage for judgment debtors. The court denied the motion to strike, adopted a magistrate judge’s recommendation concerning attorney-client privilege and work-product protection, and rejected Lexington Insurance Company’s argument that the plaintiffs lacked standing to assert unfair and deceptive trade practices and bad-faith claims. The order directs the parties to submit an updated proposed schedule.

Holdings

  1. The motion to strike portions of Lexington's pleadings and mutual-mistake defenses was denied because the pending partial-summary-judgment motion addressed overlapping issues and striking the pleadings would be a drastic remedy.
  2. The court adopted Magistrate Judge Meyers's memorandum and recommendation concerning the withheld documents and resolved the motion to compel in accordance with that recommendation.
  3. Lexington was not entitled to judgment on the pleadings because plaintiffs plausibly alleged unfair and deceptive trade practices and common-law bad faith, and the court declined to hold that plaintiffs were categorically barred from proceeding as third-party beneficiaries or persons in sufficient privity with Lexington.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether portions of Lexington's answers and mutual-mistake defenses should be stricken under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f).
  2. Whether plaintiffs were entitled under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37 to compel production of documents withheld under the attorney-client privilege or work product doctrine.
  3. Whether plaintiffs plausibly alleged standing and claims for unfair and deceptive trade practices and common-law bad faith against an insurer of judgment debtors, such that Lexington was not entitled to judgment on the pleadings under Rule 12(c).

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (23)

  • Bell v. Koss, 2020 WL 4570439, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. 2020)(followed)
  • Waste Mgmt. Holdings, Inc. v. Gilmore, 252 F.3d 316, 347 (4th Cir. 2001)(followed)
  • Mainstreet Collection, Inc. v. Kirkland’s, Inc., 270 F.R.D. 238, 241 (E.D.N.C. 2010)(followed)
  • Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005)(followed)
  • Dunlap v. TM Trucking of the Carolinas, LLC, 288 F. Supp. 3d 654, 662 (D.S.C. 2017)(followed)
  • Alexander v. City of Greensboro, 801 F. Supp. 2d 429, 433 (M.D.N.C. 2011)(followed)
  • Mylan Labs., Inc. v. Matkari, 7 F.3d 1130, 1134 (4th Cir. 1993)(followed)
  • Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555, 570 (2007)(followed)
  • Mendenhall v. Hanesbrands, Inc., 856 F. Supp. 2d 717, 724 (M.D.N.C. 2012)(followed)
  • Drager v. PLIVA USA, Inc., 741 F.3d 470, 474 (4th Cir. 2014)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 23.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…