Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Gallup, Inc. v. Greenwich Insurance Co.

Superior Court of Delaware, New Castle

March 20, 2015

GALLUP, INC., Plaintiff,
v.
GREENWICH INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

Submitted: March 12, 2015

Upon Defendant's Motion for Clarification As To The Court's February 25, 2015 Order Or, In The Alternative, For Reargument

Upon Defendant's Motion to Strike Or For Leave To Reply To Gallup, Inc.'s Response To Motion For Clarification Or, In The Alternative, For Reargument

Brian M. Rostocki, Esquire and Diana Rabeh, Esquire, Reed Smith LLP, Carolyn H. Rosenberg, Esquire and Mark S. Hersh, Esquire, Reed Smith LLP, Attorneys for Plaintiff.

Carmella P. Keener, Esquire, Rosenthal, Monhait & Goddess, P.A., Stacey L. McGraw, Esquire and Brandon D. Almond, Esquire, Troutman Sanders LLP, Attorneys for Defendant.

ORDER

Ferris W. Wharton, Judge

This 20th day of March, 2015, upon consideration of Defendant's Motion for Clarification As To The Court's February 25, 2015 Order Or, In The Alternative, For Reargument, the Plaintiff's Response and Defendant's Motion to Strike Or For Leave To Reply To Gallup, Inc.'s Response To Motion For Clarification Or, In The Alternative, For Reargument it appears to the Court that:

(1) On June 5, 2014, the Court approved the parties' stipulation to resolve the dispute as a matter of law by submitting cross motions for judgment on the pleadings.[1] The parties submitted cross motions to the Court and appeared before the Court for oral argument on November 13, 2014.

(2) In their respective motions for judgment on the pleadings, the parties asked the Court to address some of the same issues; however, Plaintiff requested that the Court address two additional issues. Both parties requested that the Court determine whether Delaware or Nebraska substantive law applies; whether the Settlement is "Loss" as defined in the Policy; and whether the Professional Services Exclusion precludes payment for the Settlement. Plaintiff additionally requested that the Court address whether the Contract Exclusion precludes coverage and whether the Allocation Provision applies. The parties raised no other issues before the Court.

(3) By Order dated February 25, 2015, the Court determined that Defendant failed to establish a choice of law conflict between Delaware and Nebraska law;[2] the Settlement is "Loss" as defined in the Policy;[3] and the Professional Services Exclusion does not preclude payment of the Settlement.[4]The Court also found that Plaintiff failed to establish that no genuine issue of material fact exists regarding the Contract Exclusion and Allocation Provision.[5]The Court made no other findings.

(4) The Court will consider the viability of Defendant's other asserted defenses only upon submission of further motions.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the Defendant's Motion for Clarification As To The Court's February 25, 2015 Order Or, In The Alternative, For Reargument is hereby DENIED and Defendant's Motion to Strike Or For Leave To Reply To Gallup, Inc.'s Response To Motion For Clarification Or, In The Alternative, For Reargument is hereby MOOT.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.