The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge Joseph Spero
JAMESN B. NEBEL (Bar No. 69626) FLYNN, DELICH & WISE LLP 2 343 Sansome Street, Suite 540 San Francisco, CA 94104 3 Telephone: (415) 693-5566 Facsimile: (415) 693-0410 4 Email: email@example.com 5 Attorneys for Plaintiff ALEXANDER MARINE CO., LTD. 6 7 JOHN D. GIFFIN (Bar No. 89608) KEESAL, YOUNG & LOGAN 8 A Professional Corporation 450 Pacific Avenue 9 San Francisco, California 94133 10 Telephone: (415) 398-6000 FLYNN, DELICH & WISE LLP Facsimile: (415) 981-0136 11 Email: firstname.lastname@example.org Attorneys for Defendant ATTORNEYS AT LAW SANSOME STREET, SUITE 540 SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94104 SHINKONG INSURANCE CO., LTD. (415) 693
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT AND REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
Date: September 16, 2011 Time: 1:30 p.m.
Before: Honorable Joseph C. Spero Courtroom A, 15th Floor
ALEXANDER MARINE CO., LTD., ("Alexander Marine") and SHINKONG 25 INSURANCE CO., LTD., ("Shinkong") submit this Joint Case Management Statement and Request for Continuance of the Case Management Conference scheduled for September 16, 2011 27 at 1:30 p.m.
Alexander Marine is a manufacturer of ocean-going yachts. Shinkong is an insurer. Both companies are based in Taiwan.
This action arises out of a shipment of an Alexander Marine yacht from Taiwan to Port Everglades, Florida. Shinkong issued a policy of marine insurance covering the shipment. The policy is subject to English law and practice.
When the yacht arrived at the discharge port it was found to have been damaged. The damage occurred when another yacht that was secured in a cradle adjacent to the insured yacht slipped from its cradle during heavy weather, striking and damaging the insured yacht.
Alexander Marine submitted a timely claim to Shinkong for damage to the yacht.
Shinkong has paid for the repair of the damage but Alexander Marine claims that it is also entitled to recover for diminution in the yacht's value on resale because of the damage.
At the initial Case Management Conference held in the case on June 17, 2011, the parties advised the Court of their plan to submit the questions in the case that are subject to English law to a panel of English solicitors specializing in marine insurance. The opinion of the majority of the panel of solicitors will be binding on the parties as to the application of English law to the parties' agreed facts and may be dispositive of the entire case. Since that initial conference, counsel for the parties have received specific approval from their respective clients for the proposal, have agreed upon a panel of neutral solicitors/arbitrators, have stipulated to pertinent facts, have drafted and are editing a letter to the arbitrators and have been in contact with the mediator assigned to the case through the Court's program. Counsel also had a conference call last week with Daniel Bowling of the Court's ADR staff about the status of the case and timing of potential mediation.
In short, while the parties are slightly behind where they expected to be at this juncture, they have the protocol in place and will proceed to obtain the opinion on English law that they believe to be necessary for the resolution of the case. Under the circumstances the parties request that the Case Management Conference, currently scheduled for September 16, 2011, be continued for a period of 60 to 90 days. to December 16, 2011 at 1:30 p.m.