Delaware Life Insurance Company v. Carey et al

Filing 17

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE REGARDING COURT'S SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION. Show Cause Response due by 11/7/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Susan van Keulen on 10/24/2017. (ofr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/24/2017)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 DELAWARE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, 8 Plaintiff, 9 10 v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE REGARDING COURT’S SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION CYNTHIA JANE CAREY, et al., 11 United States District Court Northern District of California Case No. 17-cv-04104-SVK Defendants. 12 Before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion seeking permission to serve Defendant Cynthia Jane 13 14 Carey by publication and seeking an extension of time to complete that service. ECF 16. In 15 reviewing Plaintiff’s motion, the Court notes a possible jurisdictional defect. Accordingly, the 16 Court hereby ORDERS Plaintiff to show cause why the Court has subject matter jurisdiction over 17 this case. This is an interpleader action in which Plaintiff Delaware Life Insurance Company seeks to 18 19 resolve competing claims the proceeds of a life insurance policy issued to Patrick F. Carey, who 20 died on January 28, 2017. See ECF 1 at ¶ 11. Plaintiff invokes the Court’s jurisdiction under the 21 Federal Interpleader Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1335. Id. at ¶ 1. That statute gives district courts original 22 jurisdiction over interpleader actions where (1) an amount of $500 or more is at stake, and (2) two 23 or more adverse claimants of diverse citizenship are claiming or may claim to be entitled to the 24 money. 28 U.S.C. § 1335(a). According to the Complaint, the insurance proceeds at stake in this case total $12,091.63. 25 26 ECF 1 at ¶ 21. This satisfies the amount in controversy requirement for a statutory interpleader 27 action. 28 Plaintiff has received adverse and conflicting claims to the insurance proceeds from Patrick 1 Carey’s children (Christine Marie Carey and Jefferson Richard Carey) and Patrick Carey’s ex-wife 2 (Cynthia Jane Carey). Id. at ¶ 20. According to the Complaint, Defendants Jefferson Carey and 3 Cynthia Carey are citizens and residents of California, and Defendant Christine Carey is a citizen 4 and resident of Missouri. Id. at ¶¶ 4-6. If correct, this would satisfy the minimal diversity 5 requirements for a statutory interpleader action. 6 Plaintiff’s recent motion regarding service of Cynthia Carey casts doubt as to whether two 7 or more of the claimants are of diverse citizenship, however. Plaintiff served Defendant Christine 8 Carey in California, not Missouri. ECF 11 (proof of service stating that summons was served on 9 Christine Carey in Watsonville, California). Plaintiff’s evidence concerning its unsuccessful attempts to serve Cynthia Carey also includes evidence that Christine Carey was found at a 11 United States District Court Northern District of California 10 property in Watsonville, California on another occasion. ECF 16-3 at p. 16. 12 Accordingly, it appears that the claimants in this case may not meet the requirements for 13 minimal diversity under 28 U.S.C. § 1335(a). By November 7, 2017, Plaintiff must show cause in 14 writing why this action should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Court 15 will defer ruling on Plaintiff’s motion relating to service of Cynthia Carey until the jurisdictional 16 issue has been resolved. 17 SO ORDERED. 18 Dated: October 24, 2017 19 20 SUSAN VAN KEULEN United States Magistrate Judge 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?