Lennar Mare Island, LLC v. Steadfast Insurance

Good Law
139 F. Supp. 3d 1141·2015 WL 6123730·92 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 1528·2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141305
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 16, 2015No. 2:12-cv-02182-KJM-KJNCalifornia12,788 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Mueller, J.

ORDER

In "this case, Lennar Mare Island, LLC (LMI), CH2M Hill Constructors, Inc. (CCI), and Steadfast Insurance Company dispute their obligations with respect to the clean-up of Mare Island, a former U.S. Navy shipyard. This order addresses LMI’s and CCI’s motions to dismiss Steadfast’s Améñded Counterclaim under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and 12(b)(7). The matter was submitted without a hearing. For the following reasons, the motions are granted in part.

*1146 I. BACKGROUND

First, to avoid confusion, a preliminary note on the parties’ identities: LMI is the plaintiff in this action, and Steadfast is the defendant. See Am. Compl. ¶¶ 1-2, ECF No. 22. Steadfast asserts counterclaims against LMI and CCI. See Am. Coun-tercl. ¶¶ 2-3, ECF No. 164-1. 1 CCI also asserts counterclaims against Steadfast, but not LMI. See CCI Answer & Coun-tercl., ECF No. 12. The matter is before the court on LMI’s and CCI’s motions to dismiss Steadfast’s amended counterclaim. LMI Mot., ECF No. 293; CCI Mot., ECF No. 297.

A. Steadfast’s Allegations

Because LMI and CCI bring motions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), the court assumes the allegations of Steadfast’s amended…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.