Case Activity (56687)

1. Order | Filed: August 28, 2026 | Entered: August 28, 2026 Lily 1993, Inc. et al v. Spinnaker Insurance Company et al

   Insurance | California Central

   Minutes of In Chambers Order/Directive - no proceeding held ~Util - Terminate Civil Case

   IN CHAMBERS) NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT OF ENTIRE ACTION 45 (Filed August 28, 2026) by Judge Christina A. Snyder: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is hereby removed from this Court's active caseload until further application by the parties or order of this Court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel shall file a proper stipulation for dismissal or a joint report detailing settlement status within 30 days and every quarter thereafter until a stipulation for dismissal is filed. See document for further information. (Made JS-6. Case Terminated.) (es)

2. Order | Filed: August 28, 2026 | Entered: August 28, 2026 Coaction Specialty Management Company, Inc. et al v. eMaxx Insurance Services, LLC et al

   Insurance | New York Southern

   Order on Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply

   ORDER granting 104 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply re 92 MOTION to Amend/Correct Coaction's Complaint. Defendants' request for an extension until September 11, 2026 to file any opposition to the motion for leave to amend is granted. However, Defendants' motion to dismiss the initial complaint is still pending on the docket, (Doc. 43), even though one of the moving parties, PC3, is currently in default, (see id.). Defendants previously indicated that, although their motion to dismiss would "become moot," if Plaintiffs' motion for leave to amend "is not opposed or is granted," (Doc. 90), that they would not take the same position if the motion for leave to amend is opposed and is denied. New York Insurance Law § 1213(c)(1)(A) required Defendant PC3 to post pre-answer security in this matter. (Doc. 52 at 1719.) Defendant PC3 improperly responded to the initial complaint before posting security, and the currently pending motion to dismiss is the result of that improper response. Defendant PC3 subsequently defaulted, failing to post bond. (Docs. 86-88.) Defendant's forthcoming response to Plaintiffs' motion for leave to amend, (Doc. 92), shall contain the legal basis, if any, for why I should not deny the pending motion to dismiss as moot without prejudice to refile a motion to dismiss either the complaint or amended complaint, depending on the outcome of any ruling on the motion for leave to amend. Responses due by 9/11/2026 (Signed by Judge Vernon S. Broderick on 8/28/2026) (vfr)

3. 56685 additional result(s)