Skip to Navigation
The Collaborative Clearinghouse for Lawsuits and Other Claims Against ACE Group Insurance Companies


ATTENTION: It is possible that this information may no longer be current and therefore may be inaccurate. The index contains both open and closed cases and is not a complete list of cases in which an ACE Insurance Group company is involved. This information is provided to give interested persons an idea of the issues disputed in the indexed cases. For a full understanding of a case, one should read the rest of the court file, including the response. For the most up-to-date and complete information on a case, visit or contact the clerk of the relevant court.

Case Number: 
6:11-cv-00075 Search Pacer
ACE Group party(s): 
Opposing Party: 
Hillerich & Bradsby Co.
Court Type: 
US District Court: 
District of Montana
Date Filed: 
Dec 14 2011

"1. On or about November 15,2011, an Amended Complaint was filed by Plaintiff against Defendant in the Montana First Judicial District Court, Lewis and Clark County, Cause No. BDV 2011-909.

2. On November 15,2011, Defendant, through the Montana Insurance Commissioner, received a copy ofthe Summons and Amended Complaint in the above action. Copies ofthe Amended.Summons and Amended Complaint are attached hereto as Exhibits A and B. Prior to that date, Defendant has not received, by service or otherwise, a copy ofthe summons and complaint filed in the state court action.

3. Other than the documents attached as Exhibits A and B, Defendant has not been served with any other pleadings, papers or orders in this action, and fewer than thirty days have elapsed since the initial pleading was received.

4. No other proceedings have been had in this action.

5. Defendant seeks removal ofthis action, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 144 I (b). This is a civil action over which this Court has original jurisdiction, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. It is a dispute between citizens of different states and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs.

7. Plaintiffwas at the time ofthe commencement ofthis action, and is now, a Kentucky corporation, being formed in the state ofKentucky, and having its principal place ofbusiness in Louisville, Kentucky. Defendant was at the time of the commencement of this action, and is now, a Permsylvania corporation, being formed in the state ofPennsylvania, and having its principal places of business in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. As a result, for purposes of28 U.S.C. § 1332( a), there is complete diversity ofcitizenship between the parties. See 28 U.S.c. § 1332(cXl).

8. . Plaintiff's Complaint asserts three causes ofaction: Breach of Contract, Declaratory Judgment, and Violations ofMont. Code Ann. § 33-18-201. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant breached the provisions of an insurance policy it issued Plaintiff and seeks, as damages, certain attorney fees and costs Plaintiff incurred in an underlying matter, including fees and costs for appealing the verdict in that case. Plaintiff seeks other contract damages, and compensatory and punitive damages under Montana's unfair claims settlement practices statutes.Defendant believes therefore, and avers, that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 based on the claims and the damages Plaintiff seeks.

9. This Notice ofRemoval is filed timely with this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.c. § 1446(b), because thirty days have not expired since this action became removable to this Court.

10. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d), written notice ofthe filing of this Notice of Removal will be given to counsel for Plainti:r:t: and a copy of the Notice ofRemoval will be filed with the Clerk ofthe Montana First Judicial District Court, Lewis and Clark County.

WHEREFORE, Defendant prays that the United States District Court for the District ofMontana, Helena Division, accept this Notice ofRemoval and assume jurisdiction of this cause and that it issue such further orders and processes as may be necessary to bring before it all parties necessary for the trial hereof."

The provided text is an excerpt from a document filed in this case. For a full understanding of the case, one should read the complete court file, including the response.

Javascript is required to view this map.