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)
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?