Campbell et al v. Hunter Engineering Company

Filing 39

ORDER re 26 Interpleader filed by Zurich American Insurance Company. Signed by Judge Lucy H. Koh on June 7, 2013. (lhklc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/7/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN JOSE DIVISION

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE
COMPANY,

)
)
)
Intervenor,
)
)
v.
)
)
HUNTER ENGINEERING COMPANY, and
)
DOES 1 through 40,
)
)
Defendant.
)
_______________________________________ )
)
TYRONE CAMPBELL and KIM CAMPBELL, )
)
Plaintiffs,
)
v.
)
)
HUNTER ENGINEERNIG COMPANY, and
)
DOES 1 through 40,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)

Case No.:12-CV-03777-LHK
ORDER RE: COMPLAINT IN
INTERVENTION

23
24
25
26
27
28

On June 12, 2012, Plaintiffs Tyrone Campbell and Kim Campbell filed a Complaint in the
Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara against Defendants Hunter Engineering
Company and Does 1 through 40, seeking damages for personal injuries involving an alleged
incident on July 18, 2011, 112-CV-226352. See ECF No. 1, Notice of Removal from Superior
Court, County of Santa Clara (“Notice of Removal”), Ex. A. Specifically, Plaintiffs allege that
Plaintiff Tyrone Campbell was injured by a swing-air jack manufactured by Defendant Hunter
Engineering. Id. On July 18, 2012, Defendant Hunter Engineering Company filed a Notice of
Case No.: 12-CV-03777-LHK
ORDER RE: COMPLAINT IN INTERVENTION

1
2
3

Removal of Action under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b), initiating the instant action. See Notice of
Removal.
On March 21, 2013, Proposed Intervenor Zurich American Insurance Company (“Zurich

4
5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

11
12

American”) filed a “Complaint in Intervention FRCP Rule 25,” in the instant action. ECF No. 26.
The Complaint alleges that Zurich American provided workers’ compensation coverage for
Plaintiff Tyrone Campbell at the time of the incident, and that it has had to expend substantial sums
for disability indemnity and medical benefits paid to Plaintiff, and will be required to expend
further sums in the future for workers’ compensation disability indemnity, medical expenses, and
other benefits under the workers’ compensation laws of the State of California. Id. ¶¶ 5, 17.
Zurich American alleges that it is “entitled to intervene in this action, pursuant to the provisions of
[t]he Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 24(a)(2) and Rule 24(b)(1)(B).” Id. ¶ 18.
In the same document, Zurich American included a “[Proposed] Order Granting Leave to

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

File Complaint in Intervention FRCP Rule 24.” Id. p. 7. The proposed order states, “Upon reading
and considering the foregoing Application for Order Granting Leave to Intervene and the
(Proposed) Complaint in Intevention attached thereto, for good cause appearing: IT IS HEREBY
ORDERED that ENDURANCE REINSURANCE COPRORATION1 is granted leave to intervene
on this action, and to file aforesaid Complaint in Intervention.” Id. However, Zurich has not filed
an “Application for Order Granting Leave to Intervene,” nor has it filed any other motion to
intervene to comply with Rule 24’s procedural requirements. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(c) (“Notice
and Pleading Required. A motion to intervene must be served on the parties as provided in Rule 5.
The motion must state the grounds for intervention and be accompanied by a pleading that sets out
the claim or defense for which intervention is sought.”).
If Zurich American seeks to intervene in the instant action, it shall file an appropriate

24
25
26
27
28

motion after obtaining an available hearing date pursuant to the San Jose Judges’ Standing Order.
Prior to filing such a motion, Zurich American must meet and confer with the parties to seek a
stipulation to Zurich’s intervention.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

1

The relationship of Endurance Reinsurance Company to the instant action, if any, is not clear.

Case No.: 12-CV-03777-LHK
ORDER RE: COMPLAINT IN INTERVENTION

1
2

Dated: June 7, 2013

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Case No.: 12-CV-03777-LHK
ORDER RE: COMPLAINT IN INTERVENTION

_________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge