Foods v. Lexington Insurance Co.

Full title: CONAGRA FOODS, INC., Plaintiff, v. LEXINGTON INSURANCE CO., Defendant

Court: Superior Court of Delaware, New Castle County

Date published: Feb 4, 2010

C.A. No. 09C-02-170 FSS (Del. Super. Ct. Feb. 4, 2010)

Opinion

C.A. No. 09C-02-170 FSS.

February 4, 2010.

Upon Cross-Applications for Certification of an Interlocutory Appeal

ORDER

FRED S. SILVERMAN, Judge.

1. The January 21, 2010 order interpreted the insurance policy at the case's core. On one hand, the order holds that Conagra must pay a higher deductible (per-Occurrence Retained Limit), and Lexington's duty to defend has not been triggered. On the other hand, the order denies Lexington's motion for summary judgment on Conagra's "bad faith claim." As to the latter, the court found that discovery might support Conagra's claim that it misled its insured into the reasonable belief that Lexington would defend and cover Conagra's losses.

2. While the January 21, 2010 order is important to both sides and it would be convenient for the parties and this court if the parties' cross-appeals were decided interlocutorily, such an appeal's outcome will not be case-dispositive. Otherwise, the parties can stipulate to a final judgment and pursue direct appeal(s).

For the foregoing reasons, the court declines to certify any interlocutory appeal from it January 21, 2010 order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.