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: 
2:13-cv-08336 Search Pacer
ACE Group party(s): 
Opposing Party: 
WACO Fire and Casualty Insurance Company
Court Type: 
US District Court: 
Central District of California
Date Filed: 
Nov 8 2013

Despite the efforts of the courts to achieve a fair, timely and just outcome in all cases, litigation
has become an often lengthy and expensive process. For this reason, it is this Court's policy to
encourage parties to attempt to settle their disputes, whenever possible, through alternative dispute
resolution (ADR).
ADR can reduce both the time it takes to resolve a case and the costs of litigation, which can be
substantial. ADR options include mediation, arbitration (binding or non-binding), neutral evaluation
(NE), conciliation, mini-trial and fact-finding. ADR can be either Court-directed or privately
The Court's ADR Program offers mediation through a panel of qualified and impartial attorneys
who will encourage the fair, speedy and economic resolution of civil actions. Panel Mediators each
have at least ten years of legal experience and are appointed by the Court. They volunteer their
preparation time and the first three hours of a mediation session. This is a cost-effective way for parties
to explore potential avenues of resolution.
This Court requires that counsel discuss with their clients the ADR options available and
instructs them to come prepared to discuss the parties' choice of ADR option (settlement conference
before a magistrate judge; Court Mediation Panel; private mediation) at the initial scheduling
conference. Counsel are also required to indicate the client's choice of ADR option in advance of that
conference. See Civil L.R. 26-1 (c) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(f).
Clients and their counsel should carefully consider the anticipated expense of litigation, the
uncertainties as to outcome, the time it will take to get to trial, the time an appeal will take if a decision
is appealed, the burdens on a client's time, and the costs and expenses of litigation in relation to the
amounts or stakes involved.
With more than 15,000 civil cases filed in the District in 2012, less than 1 percent actually went
to trial. Most cases are settled between the parties; voluntarily dismissed; resolved through Courtdirected
or other forms of ADR; or dismissed by the Court as lacking in merit or for other reasons
provided by law.
For more information about the Court's ADR Program, the Mediation Panel, and the profiles of
mediators, visit the Court website,, under "ADR."

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.