United Financial Casualty Company v. Kansas E3, LLC et al

5:24-cv-05094ArwdApr 2, 2025

Full text

Case 5:24-cv-05094-TLB Document 45 Filed 04/02/25 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>
Case 5:24-cv-05094-TLB Document 45 Filed 04/02/25 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>

OCR transcription for search; preserved printed pages are authoritative

Case 5:24-cv-05094-TLB Document45 ~~ Filed 04/02/25 Page 1 of 2 PagelD #:
<pagelD>

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION
UNITED FINANCIAL CASUALTY COMPANY PLAINTIFF
V. CASE NO. 5:24-CV-5094

KANSAS E3, LLC; RED LINE
CONTRACTORS, LLC; FIDEL RUA;
JASON FLYNN; and AMANDA FLYNN DEFENDANTS

ORDER

Now before the Court are Plaintiff United Financial Casualty Company’s Motion for
Summary Judgment (Doc. 34), Statement of Facts (Doc. 35), and Brief in Support (Doc.
36); Separate Defendants Kansas E3, Red Line Contractors, LLC, and Fidel Rua’s
Response in Opposition (Doc. 39), Response to Statement of Facts (Doc. 40), and Brief
in Support (Doc. 41); and Plaintiff's Reply (Doc. 44). The Court is aware that on a motion
for summary judgment, the moving party bears the burden of proving the absence of any
material factual disputes and that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. See Fed.
R. Civ. P. 56(c); Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 586-
87 (1986). The Court must view the facts and any logical inferences that may be drawn
from those facts in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. Canada v. Union
Elec. Co., 135 F.3d 1211, 1212-13 (8th Cir. 1997).

A review of the parties’ briefing and attached exhibits persuades the Court that
summary judgment is inappropriate. There remain genuine, material disputes of fact as
to which of two vehicles—one insured and the other uninsured—was involved in an

accident. The insurance coverage dispute at the heart of this declaratory judgment action

Case 5:24-cv-05094-TLB Document 45 ~ Filed 04/02/25 Page 2 of 2 PagelD #:
<pagelD>

turns on the identification of the vehicle, which the witnesses dispute. This matter must
therefore be tried to a jury.
IT IS ORDERED that the Motion a Summary Judgment (Doc. 34) is DENIED.

A
IT IS SO ORDERED on this a day of April, 2025.

STRICT JUDGE

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.