Hotchalk, Inc. v. Scottsdale Insurance Co.

Good Law
217 F. Supp. 3d 1058·2016 WL 6818760·2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 163046
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaNovember 15, 2016No. C 16-3883 CWCalifornia3,412 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Wilken, J.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT SCOTTSDALE’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

Defendant Scottsdale Insurance Co. files a motion under Rule 12(c) which provides for a motion for judgment on the pleadings, although Scottsdale titled it a motion to dismiss Plaintiff HotChalk Inc.’s complaint. Docket No. 16. HotChalk has filed a response, and Scottsdale has filed a reply. Also before the Court is Scottsdale’s request for judicial notice. Docket No. 16-1. Having considered oral argument on the motions and the papers submitted by the parties, the Court GRANTS Scottsdale’s motions. The Court grants HotChalk leave to file an amended complaint within seven days, if it can properly do so.

BACKGROUND

This case arises out of an insurance coverage dispute between HotChalk and Scottsdale. HotChalk alleges Scottsdale sold it a business and management indemnity policy, EKS3115498, providing directors and officers coverage for the period November 13, 2013 to November 13, 2014. HotChalk alleges Scottsdale violated *1061 the policy when it refused to defend and indemnify HotChalk in a lawsuit alleging violations of the False Claims Act.

HotChalk helps universities create or expand their online…

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.