Opinion
C.A. No. 09C-11-174 FSS.
December 9, 2010.
Upon Defendant's Application for Certification of an Interlocutory Appeal — DENIED.
ORDER
1. The November 5, 2010 and the November 23, 2010 orders denying summary judgment and reargument interpreted the excess insurance policy at the case's core.
2. While the November orders are important and it would be convenient for the parties and this court if Defendant's appeal were decided interlocutorily, unless Defendant prevails, an interlocutory appeal will not be case-dispositive. While the orders resolved the core issue, they left other issues. The open issues, however, could be resolved relatively quickly. Otherwise, the parties can stipulate to a final judgment and Defendant can then pursue its direct appeal. Either way, the Supreme Court will be spared the risk of successive appeals.
For the foregoing reasons, the court declines to certify an interlocutory appeal from its November orders.
IT IS SO ORDERED.