Opinion
CIVIL ACTION 01-3415 SECTION "T" (1)
April 16, 2002
Before the Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment (Document No. 5) filed on behalf of Defendant. Old Republic Union Insurance Company. The parties waived oral argument and the matter March 27, 2002. The Court, having considered the arguments of the parties, the Court record, the law, applicable jurisprudence, and noting the Plaintiffs' failure to respond to this Motion, is fully advised in the premises and ready to rule.
ORDER AND REASONS
I. BACKGROUND:
This litigation involves a motor vehicle accident in which a vehicle occupied by plaintiffs collided with a vehicle driven by Stanley Novisky and owned by Venture Transport. Old Republic Union Insurance Company ("Old Republic") provided insurance for the vehicle driven by Stanley Novisky and owned by Venture Transport, but only for property damage to Venture Transport owned vehicles. The vehicle driven by Stanley Novisky had third-party liability insurance through Gulf Insurance Company.
Plaintiffs have brought suit against Stanley Novisky, Venture Transport, and Old Republic for their personal injuries. Upon receipt of the suit, copy of the applicable Old Republic policy was sent to the Plaintiffs through counsel on November 1, 2001 with a request for a voluntary dismissal at Old Republic or an amendment of the complaint to delete Old Republic as a Defendant. On January 8, 2002, counsel for Old Republic wrote Plaintiffs and reiterated the request for dismissal and/or amendment of the complaint. Plaintiffs were also advised by counsel for Old Republic that a motion for summary judgment would be filed with a request for Rule 11 sanctions and reimbursement of defense costs if Old Republic was not dismissed from the litigation. Plaintiffs then agreed to sign a joint-motion to dismiss Old Republic. However, when that signed motion was not provided, counsel for Old Republic wrote plaintiffs again on January 30, 2002 requesting that they execute the motion to dismiss or a motion for summary judgment would be filed. The dismissal requested by counsel for Old Republic has not been filed with this Court.
II. LEGAL ANALYSIS:
A. Law on Summary Judgment
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide that summary judgment should be granted only "if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment. as a matter of law." FED. R. Civ. P. 56(c). The party moving for summary judgment bears the initial responsibility of informing the district court of the basis for its motion, and identifying those portions of the record which it believes demonstrate the absence of a genuine issue of material fact Stults v. Conoco, Inc., 76 F.3d 651, 655-56 (5th Cir. 1996) (citing Skotak v. Tenneco Resins, Inc., 953 F.2d 909, 919-13 (5th Cir.) (quoting Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323 (1986)), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 832 (1992)). When the moving party has carried its burden under Rule 56(c), its opponent must do more than simply show that there is some metaphysical doubt as to the material facts. The nonmoving party must come forward with "specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial." Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 587 (1986) (emphasis supplied); Tubacex, Inc. v. M/V RISAN, 45 F.3d 951, 954 (5th Cir. 1995).
Thus, where the record taken as a whole could not lead a rational trier of fact to find for the non moving party, there is no "genuine issue for trial." Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co., 475 U.S. at 588. Finally, the Court notes that substantive law determines the materiality of facts and only "facts that might affect the outcome of the suit under the governing law will properly preclude the entry of summary judgment." Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986).
B. Rule 11
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 states, in pertinent part;
(b)Representations to Court
by presenting to the court (whether by signing, filing, submitting, or later advocating) a pleading, written motion, or other paper, an attorney or unrepresented party is certifying that to the best of the person's knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances, —
(1)It is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass or cause unnecessary delay or needless increase in the cost of litigation;
(2)The claims, defenses, and other legal contentions therein are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivilous argument for the extension. modification, or reversal of existing law or the establishment of new law:
(3)The allegations and other factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, are likely to have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery;
(c) Sanctions
If, after notice and a reasonable opportunity to respond, the court determines that subdivision (b) has been violated, the court may, subject to the conditions stated below, impose an appropriate sanction upon the attorneys, law firms, or parties that have violated subdivision (b) or are responsible for the violation.
Sanctions may include the payment of a penalty or payment of some or all of the reasonable attorney's fees and other expenses incurred as a result of the violation. FRCP 11(c)(2).
C. Summary Judgment and Rule 11 Sanctions are Appropriate
Old Republic did not provide third-party liability coverage to anyone, including the Plaintiffs. The Old Republic policy provided coverage only for physical damage sustained to Venture Transport vehicles. (See Exhibits D and E to Motion for Summary Judgment.) There has been no proof of a genuine issue as to any material fact submitted to this Court, and therefore Summary Judgment is proper.
In addition, in light of the facts that led to the filing of this Motion for Summary Judgment, Rule 11 sanctions are proper. Plaintiffs were provided with a copy of the applicable insurance policy at the inception of the litigation. Counsel for Old Republic requested a voluntary dismissal on three occasions since November 2001. In the latter requests, counsel for Old Republic notified Plaintiffs' counsel that if the Motion for Summary Judgment had to be filed, then Rule 11 sanctions would be requested. The Court finds that Plaintiffs counsel has violated Rule 11 [specifically FRCP 11(b)], and sanctions are warranted for the cost of filing the Motion for Summary Judgment.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that the Motion for Summary Judgment (Document No. 5) filed on behalf of Defendant. Old Republic Union Insurance Company, be and the same is hereby GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion for Sanctions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 be, and the same is hereby GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel for Old Republic Union Insurance Company provide to this Court within thirty (30) days an itemized description of the costs they incurred in the filing of this Motion for Summary Judgment so that the proper amount of sanctions can be determined.