Rockhill Insurance Company v. High End Development, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROCKHILL INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No. 22-cv-03104-VC

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

v. STAY AND DENYING MOTION TO

INTERVENE

HIGH END DEVELOPMENT, INC.,

Re: Dkt. Nos. 23, 38 Defendant.

The case is stayed under the Court’s inherent authority. Landis v. North American Co., 299 U.S. 248 (1936).1 Here, the three Landis factors weigh in favor of a stay. See Lockyer v. Mirant Corp., 398 F.3d 1098, 1110 (9th Cir. 2005). The only harm to Rockhill—that it will have to pay for High End’s defense now and try to recoup later—is a cost of doing business in the insurance industry. See, e.g., Citizens Insurance Co. of America v. Chief Digital Advisors, 2020 WL 8483913 at *2 (S.D. Cal. Dec. 22, 2020). On the other hand, High End would be prejudiced if this case were to go forward now, because it would have to fight its insurance carrier at the same time it defends the underlying actions. See, e.g., Scottsdale Insurance Co. v. Bottoms Up Bar and Entertainments, Inc., 2022 WL 2203667 at *2–3 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 8, 2022). Finally, adjudicating this dispute while the other actions are in progress runs…