The Middle District of Florida’s Jacksonville Division backed a magistrate judge’s recommendations in an insurance company’s attempt to not have to defend an internet café involved in a shooting.
Maxum Indemnity Company attempted to escape defending Fun Zone Entertainment, LLC in Terrance Jones and Charles Shaw’s negligence lawsuit after the venue experienced a shooting, according to Magistrate Judge Patricia D. Barksdale.
The court agreed with one of Judge Barksdale’s recommendations for the court to deny Jones and Shaw’s request to vacate Maxum’s stipulations. Jones and Shaw ultimately questioned how acceptable the stipulations are, arguing that they’re founded on fraud. Still, the court said the argument didn’t have any merit, agreeing with Judge Barksdale that “Jones and Shaw provide no pertinent authority or coherent argument to support that they may interfere with agreements or force others to take different positions in the litigation,” according to the lawsuit.
Judge Barksdale also suggested the court refuse to enforce stipulations of Maxum, Jones, and Shaw. Maxum said Judge Barksdale “mistakenly assumed” Jones and Shaw were asking to vacate their stipulation for lack of authority when they asked to vacate because of fraud. The court also disagreed with these arguments and pointed out that Judge Barksdale did acknowledge that Jones and Shaw “loosely claim fraud and misconduct seemingly to try to establish the narrow grounds for vacatur in Rule 60(b)(3),” according to the opinion. Still, Judge Barksdale also found that Rule 60 doesn’t oversee the petitions for relief.
The court adopted all of Judge Barksdale’s suggestions, including the one that calls for the plaintiff to prove and explain why the case shouldn’t be dismissed.
“Maxum shall show cause why this court should not dismiss this action without prejudice or continue the stay considering that Maxum is not providing a defense to any party in the state actions, that Fun Zone may be a necessary or indispensable party in this action, prudential ripeness concerns, and any other pertinent factors,” wrote U.S. District Judge Marcia Morales Howard.