Sun Life Assurance Co of Canada v. Diaz et al
Filing
27
ORDER granting interpleader relief. Signed by Judge Victor A. Bolden on 10/13/2015. (LaPre, E.)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
SUN LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY
OF CANADA
Plaintiff,
v.
BRUCE DIAZ, JERRY DIAZ, TOMAS
DIAZ, AND ESTATE OF ELSON A. DIAZ
Defendants.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
CIVIL ACTION NO.
3:14-cv-01685-VAB
RULING AND ORDER
I.
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada (“Sun Life”) commenced this
interpleader action under Fed. R. Civ. P. 22 against defendants Bruce Diaz, Jerry Diaz,
Tomas Diaz, and the estate of Elson A. Diaz (the “Estate”) to determine the proper
beneficiary or beneficiaries of a $24,000 death benefit (the “Death Benefit”) owing under
a life insurance policy (the “Policy”) covering the deceased Elson A. Diaz.
In a ruling dated April 22, 2015 (the “April Ruling”), the Court concluded that it
had subject matter jurisdiction over this matter, and that Sun Life had satisfied the
requirements of the first stage of the two-stage interpleader inquiry. ECF No. 17. The
Court ordered Sun Life to deposit the Death Benefit in the registry of the Court, and Sun
Life did so. The Court discharged Sun Life from further liability under the Policy with
respect to the death of Elson A. Diaz.
At that point, no defendant had appeared in this action. Thus, the Clerk entered
defaults against all defendants under Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). ECF No. 18. The Court
declined to conclude the second stage of the interpleader inquiry (i.e., adjudicate
1
adverse claims to the property), and instead caused the Clerk to (i) mail to each
defendant a copy of the April Ruling; (ii) mail to each defendant a notice explaining that
failure to appear would result in forfeiture of any claim to the Death Benefit; and (iii) in
order to serve the notice on the Estate, publish it in a newspaper of general circulation
in Waterbury, Connecticut once per week for two consecutive weeks.
Jerry Diaz appeared, filed a claim to the Death Benefit, and answered the
interpleader complaint. ECF Nos. 22, 24, 25. No other defendant appeared. The Court
will now conclude the second stage of the interpleader inquiry. The Court assumes
familiarity with the background of this case, which is set forth in the April Ruling.
II.
DISCUSSION
An interpleader action generally involves a two-stage inquiry. New York Life Ins.
Co. v. Connecticut Dev. Auth., 700 F.2d 91, 95 (2d Cir. 1983). First, the stakeholder
must demonstrate that the requirements for interpleader are met and that the plaintiff
stakeholder is entitled to a discharge from liability. Id. Second, the Court adjudicates
the adverse claims to the property. Id.
The second stage is obviated where only one defendant has appeared and made
a claim to the property. See id. at 95-96 (affirming portion of judgment directing
payment of insurance benefits to sole non-defaulted defendant and noting that other
defendants’ defaults “did not make the interpleader action inappropriate but merely
expedited its conclusion by obviating the normal second stage.”). “The failure of a
named interpleader defendant to answer the interpleader complaint and assert a claim
to the res can be viewed as forfeiting any claim of entitlement that might have been
2
asserted.” Gen. Acc. Grp. v. Gagliardi, 593 F. Supp. 1080, 1089 (D. Conn. 1984) aff'd,
767 F.2d 907 (2d Cir. 1985).
Several attempts have been made to notify all defendants that failure to appear
in this action would result in forfeiture of any claim to the Death Benefit. Jerry Diaz is
the only defendant who appeared and made claim to the Death Benefit. The other
defendants have been defaulted. See Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Little, No. 13 CV 1059
(BMC), 2013 WL 4495684, at *2 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 17, 2013) (default alone is sufficient to
conclude that party forfeited claim to property). Accordingly, the Court concludes that
all defendants but Jerry Diaz have forfeited their claims to the Death Benefit. By virtue
of his status as the sole defendant who has appeared and asserted a claim to the Death
Benefit, Jerry Diaz is entitled to the funds that were deposited in the registry of this
Court. See New York Life Ins. Co., 700 F.2d at 95 (affirming judgment directing that
proceeds deposited with court be paid to sole remaining non-defaulted defendant);
Gagliardi, 593 F. Supp. at 1089.
III.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated herein, it is hereby ORDERED that judgment shall enter
in Defendant Jerry Diaz’s favor, and that the Clerk shall pay to Jerry Diaz’s counsel the
$24,000 deposited in the registry of this Court in connection with this matter and close
this case.
SO ORDERED at Bridgeport, Connecticut this thirteenth day of October, 2015.
/s/ Victor A. Bolden
VICTOR A. BOLDEN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
3
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?