Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Pepsi-Cola Metropolitan Bottling Company, Inc v. Allstate Insurance Company

March 23, 2012

PEPSI-COLA METROPOLITAN BOTTLING COMPANY, INC., PLAINTIFF,
v.
ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, AS SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST TO NORTHBROOK EXCESS AND SURPLUS INSURANCE COMPANY, FORMERLY KNOWN AS NORTHBROOK INSURANCE COMPANY; CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY; CERTAIN LONDON MARKET COMPANIES; EQUITAS INSURANCE LIMITED (FORMERLY SPEYFORD LIMITED); AND FIRST STATE INSURANCE COMPANY, DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. John A. Kronstadt

PROTECTIVE ORDER DISCOVERY MATTER NOTE: CHANGES HAVE BEEN MADE TO THIS DOCUMENT

A. WHEREAS, this action concerns an insurance coverage dispute between plaintiff Pepsi-Cola Metropolitan Bottling Company, Inc. ("Pepsi") and its insurers, defendants Allstate Insurance Company, as successor-in-interest to Northbrook Excess and Surplus Insurance Company, formerly known as Northbrook Insurance Company ("Allstate"), Continental Casualty Company ("Continental"), Certain London Market Companies ("London"), First State Insurance Company ("First State") and Equitas Insurance Limited, formerly Speyford Limited) ("EIL"), ("The Coverage Action" and the parties to the coverage action shall be referred to as the "Parties") in connection with certain underlying lawsuits in which claimants allege to have suffered bodily injury, property damage and/or personal injury as a result of exposure to constituents allegedly released or present in, at, around and in the vicinity of a Willits, California manufacturing facility operated by a predecessor to Pepsi (the "Liability Suits");

B. WHEREAS, the parties anticipate that discovery in The Coverage Action will include confidential and sensitive documents and information arising out of or related to the underlying Liability Suits, including but not limited to, medical records, employment records, education/school records, attorneys' fees records, and settlement agreements;

C. WHEREAS, some of*fn1 the Parties to this lawsuit have previously been parties to one or more of the following coverage actions involving some of the same insurance policies at issue here and either some of the Liability Suits or the same former manufacturing facility in Willits, California - Jensen-Kelly Corporation et al. v. Allianz Insurance Company, et al., Case No. BC069018 (Los Angeles Superior Court) (the "Jensen-Kelly Action"); People of the State of California v. Lloyd's of London, et al., Case No. 217769 (Sonoma County Superior Court) (the "Sonoma Action"); One Beacon Insurance Group v. PepsiAmericas, Inc., et al., Case No. 01-06929 GAF (C.D. Cal.) (the "OneBeacon Action"); and Pepsi-Cola Metropolitan Bottling Company, Inc. v. Insurance Company of North America, et al., Case No. CV-10-2696 SVW (MANx) (C.D. Cal.) (the "Pepsi Action");

D. WHEREAS, the Parties believe that discovery conducted in the Jensen-Kelly Action, the OneBeacon Action, the Sonoma Action and the Pepsi Action, which includes dozens of deposition transcripts, among other things, may be relevant to this lawsuit and/or help facilitate resolution of this lawsuit;

E. WHEREAS, discovery in the Jensen-Kelly Action, the Sonoma Action, the OneBeacon Action and the Pepsi Action is subject to protective orders entered upon showings of good cause, see Protective Orders attached as Exhibits A, B, C and D to the Stipulated Protective Order, and cannot be used in this action unless this Court enters a protective order;

F. WHEREAS, the Parties to this litigation wish to protect the confidentiality of the above-described documents and information and to ensure that the parties can obtain and pursue discovery with a minimum of delay and expense;

G. WHEREAS, the Parties agree that, in order to conduct meaningful discovery in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a Stipulated Protective Order is necessary;

H. WHEREAS, the Parties acknowledge that this Order does not confer blanket protections on all disclosures or responses to discovery and that the protection it affords extends only to the limited information or items that are entitled under the applicable legal principles to treatment as confidential; and

I. WHEREAS, the Parties submit that good cause has therefore been shown pursuant to Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED THAT:

1.DEFINITIONS

1.1 Party: any party to this Coverage Action, including all of its officers, directors, employees, consultants, retained experts, outside counsel (and their support staff), claim-handling entities, reinsurers, retrocessionaires, accountants, regulators, or auditors to whom the Parties have a contractual, statutory or regulatory obligation to report.

1.2 Disclosure or Discovery Material: all items or information, regardless of the medium or manner generated, stored, or maintained (including, among other things, testimony, transcripts, or tangible things) that are produced or generated in disclosures or responses to discovery in this matter.

1.3 "CONFIDENTIAL" Information or Items: any information which has not been made public, that the Designating Party in good faith believes is properly protected under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c), and which is properly designated as "CONFIDENTIAL" according to the procedures set forth in this Order, including, but not limited to, information and documents regarding medical records, employment records, education/school records, military records, attorneys' fees, settlement agreements, and discovery in the prior coverage actions.

1.4 Receiving Party: a Party that receives Disclosure or Discovery Material from a Producing Party.

1.5 Producing Party: a Party or non-party that produces Disclosure or Discovery Material in this action.

1.6 Designating Party: a Party or non-party that designates information or items that it produces in disclosures or in responses to discovery as "CONFIDENTIAL."

1.7 Protected Material: any Disclosure or Discovery Material that is designated as "CONFIDENTIAL." Protected Material includes all copies, abstracts, compilations, summaries, or any other form of reproducing or capturing any of the "CONFIDENTIAL" material.

1.8 Outside Counsel: attorneys who are not employees of a Party but who are retained to represent or advise a Party in this action.

1.9 In-House Counsel: attorneys who are employees of a Party or attorneys who are employees of a claim handling entity under contract by a Party.

1.10 Counsel (without qualifier): Outside Counsel and In-House Counsel (as well as their support staffs).

1.11 Expert: a person with specialized knowledge or experience in a matter pertinent to the Coverage Action who has been retained by a Party or its counsel to serve as an expert witness or as a consultant in this action and who is not a past or a current employee of a Party or of a competitor of a Party and who, at the time of retention, is not anticipated to become an employee of a Party or a competitor of a Party. This definition includes a professional jury or trial consultant retained in connection with this litigation.

1.12 Professional Vendors: persons or entities that provide litigation support services (e.g., photocopying; videotaping; translating; preparing exhibits or demonstrations; auditing, organizing, storing, retrieving, examining, sorting data in ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.