Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_99-cv-05583/USCOURTS-caed-1_99-cv-05583-30/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 110
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Insurance Contract

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES FIDELITY &

GUARANTY COMPANY, a Maryland

corporation,

Plaintiff,

v.

LEE INVESTMENTS LLC d.b.a THE

ISLAND, a California limited

liability company and DIANA

CONLEY, an individual,

Defendants.

________________________________

AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS,

CROSS-CLAIMS AND THIRD-PARTY

COMPLAINTS.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:99-cv-5583 OWW SMS

ORDER GRANTING MOTION IN

LIMINE NO. 11 OF USF&G AND

AMERICAN SPECIALTY TO

EXCLUDE EVIDENCE PERTAINING

TO NEWLY RAISED CLAIMS AND

NEW AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

On January 12, 2007, Motion in Limine No. 11 of Plaintiff,

Counterdefendant and Counterclaimant United States Fidelity &

Guaranty Company (“USF&G”) and American Specialty Insurance

Services, Inc. (“American Specialty”) to exclude evidence of

newly raised claims and defenses came on for hearing before the

Honorable Oliver W. Wanger, United States District Judge. After

having considered the motion and moving papers submitted by USF&G

and American Specialty and memorandum of points and authorities

Case 1:99-cv-05583-LJO-SMS Document 608 Filed 02/01/07 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

in opposition of Lee Investments LLC (“Lee”) and after oral

argument, 

IT IS ORDERED:

Motion in Limine No. 11 is granted. Evidence and testimony

of the following allegations are precluded:

1. The allegations made by Lee in the joint pretrial

statement that USF&G and American Specialty breached a duty to

use reasonable care, skill and diligence by: (a) failing to

disclose to Lee that Aon was also an agent for USF&G and by

breaching duties under the insurance policy; and (b) breaching

the covenant of good faith and fair dealing by failing to timely

seek cancellation or rescission of the subject policy.

2. The allegations by Lee that USF&G and/or American

Specialty intentionally, recklessly or negligently concealed

that: (a) Aon was a dual agent of both Lee and USF&G; (b)

misrepresented that Aon was only Lee’s agent; (c) misrepresented

or concealed that American Specialty was still a wholesale cobroker with Aon in connection with the USF&G policy when it was

not a front-end managing general agent for USF&G.

3. The claims for damages by Lee (a) for its unpaid

attorneys’ fees and expenses incurred in the Workers’

Compensation proceeding in Conley v. The Island, WCAB Case No.

SBR0288749 in this phase of the trial; (b) for attorneys’ fees

for bankruptcy counsel; (c) for damages for “potential exposure”

to penalties and civil damages if Lee was later found to be an

uninsured employer; (d) damages for loss of insurance coverage;

(e) damages from “inaccurate experience modification;” (f)

damages for “lost profits,” (g) damages for lost opportunities

Case 1:99-cv-05583-LJO-SMS Document 608 Filed 02/01/07 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3

incurred and to be incurred; and (h) damages for “lost investment

interest or returns.”

4. The allegations of Lee that: (a) USF&G is not the real

party in interest; (b) that Lee obtained the policy from USF&G

under duress because USF&G allegedly delayed in raising issues

contained in his August 11, 1998 correspondence to Aon; and (c)

that the WCIRB failed to grant a reclassification of the

accident.

DATED: February 1, 2007.

_/s/ OLIVER W. WANGER________

Oliver W. Wanger

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

usf&gs order on mtn in limine 11

Case 1:99-cv-05583-LJO-SMS Document 608 Filed 02/01/07 Page 3 of 3