IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
March 22, 2006
AMY JOHNSON, PLAINTIFF,
NORTHLAND INSURANCE COMPANY, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Terrence F. McVerry United States District Court Judge
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this 22nd day of March, 2006, upon consideration of NORTHLAND'S MOTION TO BIFURCATE AND STAY with brief in support (Document Nos. 16 and 17) and Plaintiff's RESPONSE TO NORTHLAND'S MOTION TO BIFURCATE AND STAY with brief in opposition (Document Nos. 18 and 19), and it appearing to the Court that failure to bifurcate discovery should not negatively affect Defendant's attorney-client privilege, applicability of the work-product doctrine or result in actual undue prejudice to Defendant and bifurcation of discovery would neither promote convenience, expedition nor judicial economy,
NOW THEREFORE, Defendant's motion to bifurcate discovery and stay the bad faith and extra-contractual claims of this action is DENIED.
However, it may later become advisable to bifurcate Plaintiff's contractual claims from the bad faith and extra-contractual claims for trial purposes and therefore Defendant's motion in this regard is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to refile at an appropriate later date in the litigation.
© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.