UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 1:20-cv-21827-DPG

SUN CUISINE, LLC d/b/a 

ZEST RESTAURANT AND MARKET,

a Florida limited liability company

on behalf of itself and all 

others similarly situated,

Plaintiff, 

v. 

CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD’S

LONDON Subscribing to Contract Number 

B0429BA1900350 Under Collective

Certificate Endorsement 350OR100802,

Defendants.

_________________________________________/ 

MOTION FOR COORDINATION OF RELATED ACTIONS

Plaintiff Sun Cuisine, LLC d/b/a Zest Restaurant and Market (“Sun Cuisine”), through 

undersigned counsel, hereby moves this Court to coordinate this action with other related actions, 

such that they may proceed in front of a single jurist. In support, Plaintiff states as follows:

1. The instant action is one of several similar actions currently pending in the Southern 

District of Florida involving the Lloyd’s of London group of insurers and asserting insurance 

coverage for business losses and expenses related to the COVID-19 pandemic. The undersigned 

counsel for Sun Cuisine also represents the plaintiff-insureds in El Novillo Restaurant v. Certain 

Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London, No. 1:20-cv-21525-UU (S.D. Fla.).

2. The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation recently denied petitions to transfer 

and consolidate more than a dozen Lloyd’s-related actions pending in several district courts across 

the country. See In re: Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London, Covid-19 Bus. Interruption Prot.

Ins. Litig., MDL No. 2961 (J.P.M.L. Oct. 2, 2020).

3. One reason for the Panel’s denial of nationwide consolidation was that “alternatives 

to centralization are available to minimize any duplication in pretrial proceedings, including 

informal cooperation and coordination among the parties and courts.” The Panel also specifically 

Case 1:20-cv-21827-DPG Document 23 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/20/2020 Page 1 of 3
2

noted “that some similar actions are pending in the same district before multiple judges, and it may 

be appropriate for the courts and the parties to relate those before one judge.” See id.

4. Sun Cuisine agrees with the Panel’s recommendation, particularly as it concerns 

the Southern District of Florida, which has the greatest number of Lloyd’s actions of any district 

court in the country. Indeed, the undersigned counsel expects several more Lloyd’s actions to be 

filed in or transferred to the Southern District in the coming weeks.

5. Sun Cuisine therefore respectfully submits that coordinating the Lloyd’s actions 

currently pending in the Southern District of Florida before a single judge would promote 

efficiency and judicial economy.1 Moreover, as the Panel noted, “[t]his litigation demands 

efficiency,” among other things because “[m]any plaintiffs are on the brink of bankruptcy[.]” See 

id.

6. Specifically, and consistent with the Panel’s instruction, coordinating the cases in 

this manner will minimize redundant pretrial proceedings, reduce duplicative discovery, and 

promote the efficient resolution of these cases. Such coordination is particularly important because 

of the high likelihood of additional Lloyd’s actions being filed in this District in the coming weeks. 

The undersigned counsel has conferred with plaintiffs’ counsel in other pending Lloyd’s actions

regarding potential coordination and is prepared to assist in an efficient coordination of these 

actions. 

7. Sun Cuisine specifically submits that the Lloyd’s actions pending in the Southern 

District should be transferred to Judge Gayles or Judge Ungaro. Judge Gayles and Judge Ungaro 

are presiding over some of the first-filed Lloyd’s actions pending in the Southern District. 

8. Moreover, on October 14, 2020, Judge Gayles held status conferences in this case

and Atma Beauty, Inc. v. HDI Global Specialty SE, No. 1:20-cv-21745 (SD. Fla.). These were 

the second status conferences in each of these two actions, both of which are now fully briefed at 

the motion to dismiss stage. During the status conferences, Judge Gayles indicated that if the 

Lloyd’s actions pending in the Southern District were related and coordinated before a single judge 

consistent with the Court’s procedures, he would be amenable to overseeing that coordinated 

1 Counsel for Sun Cuisine has conferred extensively with counsel for the Defendants 

regarding the relief sought in the instant motion and Defendants have indicated that they do not 

necessarily oppose the relief sought in this motion. Nevertheless, because the parties did not reach 

final agreement as to the specific language of the motion, Plaintiff does not file the instant motion 

as a joint or unopposed motion. 

Case 1:20-cv-21827-DPG Document 23 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/20/2020 Page 2 of 3
3

litigation. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that Judge Ungaro and Judge Gayles 

coordinate the Lloyd’s actions pending in this District, consistent with court practice and judicial 

preference, in order that the actions proceed in front of a single jurist.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on October 20, 2020, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk 

of the Court by using the CM/ECF system, which will send a notice of electronic filing to all 

counsel of record and any other electronic filer as of the time of the filing.

Respectfully submitted,

Dated: October 20, 2020

KOZYAK TROPIN & THROCKMORTON LLP

2525 Ponce de Leon Blvd., 9th Floor

Coral Gables, Florida 33134

Tel: (305) 372-1800 

By: /s/ Harley S. Tropin

Harley S. Tropin, Esq. 

Florida Bar No. 241253

hst@kttlaw.com

Benjamin Widlanski, Esq.

Florida Bar No. 1010644

bwidlanski@kttlaw.com

Gail A. McQuilkin, Esq. 

Florida Bar No. 969338

gam@kttlaw.com 

Rachel Sullivan, Esq.

Florida Bar No. 815640

rs@kttlaw.com

Robert Neary, Esq.

Florida Bar No. 81712 

rn@kttlaw.com

 Counsel for Plaintiff

Case 1:20-cv-21827-DPG Document 23 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/20/2020 Page 3 of 3