Metropolitan Life Insurance Company v. Rudig et al

Filing 17

ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. Granting 16 Motion to Deposit Funds. (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/12/2016)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, 12 Plaintiff, 13 vs. 14 JORG H. RUDIG, individually and as 15 Trustee of JORG H. RUDIG AND KAREN DUPUIS LIVING TRUST, NICOLE 16 DUPUIS, SHAYNA MASSA, URSULA RUDIG and MICHAEL SHILLINGTON, 17 Defendants. 18 Case No. 3:15-cv-05791-HSG ORDER DIRECTING DEPOSIT OF INTERPLEADER FUNDS 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 [PROPOSED] ORDER DIRECTING DEPOSIT OF INTERPLEADER FUNDS Case No. 3:15-cv-05791-HSG 36112897v1 2945 1 ORDER 2 Plaintiff-in-Interpleader Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MetLife”), 3 has filed the above-captioned interpleader action pursuant to Rule 22 of the Federal 4 Rules of Civil Procedure. The action relates to the matter of who is entitled to the 5 life insurance benefits payable due to the death of Karen Dupuis under AT&T’s 6 Basic Life Insurance Plan. It is therefore appropriate for MetLife to deposit with the 7 Court Clerk the life insurance benefits at issue in this action. Accordingly, leave is 8 hereby granted for MetLife, or its authorized agent or representative, to deposit with 9 the Court Clerk a check made payable to the “Clerk, U.S. District Court Northern 10 District of California” in the amount of $21,000 plus any accrued interest. This 11 amount represents the life insurance benefits at issue, plus interest. Such deposit 12 may be made at any time after this order is signed by the Court. 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 15 16 DATED: January 12, 2016 ________________________________________ HON. HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 [PROPOSED] ORDER DIRECTING DEPOSIT OF INTERPLEADER FUNDS Case No. 3:15-cv-05791-HSG 36112897v1 2945

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?