Soto v. Greyhound Lines et al

Filing 174

ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr., on 10/19/09 ORDERING that Defendant Nguyen's Motion for Discharge 173 is hereby GRANTED. The hearing set for 10/22/09 on Defendant's Motion is vacated. Defendant Nguyen is discharged of an y further liability to those individuals with competing claims against him as a result of the uderlying 7/1/05. The consolidated lawsuits pending against Nguyen are accordingly dismissed, although entitlement to the interpled funds between the various competing Plaintiffs (the second stage of the interpleader process) has yet to be adjudicated. (Becknal, R)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Defendants. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 In these consolidated proceedings, Plaintiffs seek personal injury damages as a result of a July 1, 2005 motor vehicle accident that occurred when the Greyhound bus in which they were passengers collided with a motor vehicle driven by Defendant Tu Phuoc Nguyen ("Defendant Nguyen"). Defendant Nguyen now moves for an order discharging him of any further liability given the tender, on his behalf, of the aggregate policy limits of insurance available to him as a result of the collision. 1 ---oo0oo---v. GREYHOUND LINES, INC., TU PHOUC NGUYEN, ENTERPRISE RENT-A-CAR COMPANY, and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, MARIA SOTO, Plaintiff, ORDER No. 2:06-cv-01612-MCE-DAD (consolidated cases) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Nguyen has represented to the Court that he has been discharged through Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceedings of any liability for the accident, aside from his available insurance policy limits in the amount of $50,000.00, which were subsequently deposited with the Clerk of this Court on September 23, 2009. submitted. Documentation to that effect has been Defendant Nguyen accordingly asks that he be No opposition to Defendant dismissed from this litigation. Nguyen's Motion has been made. Faced with numerous and potentially conflicting claims to the available insurance funds, Defendant Nguyen's tender, or interpleader, of the policy proceeds represents an attempt to force the competing claimants to litigate entitlement to the funds between themselves. Cripps v. Life Ins. Co. Of N. Am., 980 Once such funds are deposited, F.2d 1261, 1265 (9th Cir. 1992). Nguyen can properly move for a discharge of liability as to any of the potential claimants. Cantu v. Resolution Trust Corp., Once that first step in the 4 Cal. App. 4th 857, 874 (1992). interpleader process has been accomplished, the second stage involves an adjudication of the adverse claims between the competing claimants. See Metro Life Ins. Co. v. Billini, 2007 WL 4209405 at *2 (E.D. Cal. 2007). /// /// /// /// /// /// 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Given Defendant Nguyen's deposit of all insurance proceeds available to him, given his discharge in bankruptcy as to any other claims pending against him, and given the lack of any opposition to this Motion, Defendant Nguyen's Motion for Discharge (Docket No. 173) is hereby GRANTED.1 The hearing set for October 22, 2009 on Defendant's Motion is vacated. Defendant Nguyen is discharged of any further liability to those individuals with competing claims against him as a result of the underlying July 1, 2005. The consolidated lawsuits pending against Nguyen are accordingly dismissed, although entitlement to the interpled funds between the various competing Plaintiffs (the second stage of the interpleader process) has yet to be adjudicated. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: October 19, 2009 _____________________________ MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Because oral argument will not be of material assistance, the Court orders this matter submitted on the briefs. E.D. Cal. Local Rule 78-230(h). 3 1

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?