STATE FARM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY v. JONAS et al
Filing
71
ENTRY ON MOTION TO DISMISS: Accordingly, the motion to dismiss (dkt. no. 65) is GRANTED and the Plaintiff is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The Court will not enter final judgment at this time. Rather, the remaining Defendants Troy Jonas, V.J., T.A.J. and S.J. shall either interplead and litigate among themselves or stipulate as to the proper disposition of the funds being held by the Court. They shall be prepared to discuss their intended course of action at the status conference scheduled on Dec ember 18, 2013, with Magistrate Judge Dinsmore, and shall file the appropriate documents within 45 days of the date of this Entry. Final judgment will be entered once the disposition of the funds has been resolved. In light of this ruling, the final pretrial conference scheduled for January 24, 2014, and the trial scheduled for February 24, 2014, are VACATED, to be reset at the appropriate time if necessary to resolve any claims asserted between the remaining Defendants ***SEE ENTRY FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION***. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 11/26/2013.(DW)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION
STATE FARM LIFE INSURANCE CO.,
Plaintiff,
vs.
TROY JONAS, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
) CAUSE NO. 1:12-cv-1500-WTL-MJD
)
)
)
)
ENTRY ON MOTION TO DISMISS
This cause is before Court on the Plaintiff’s motion seeking to be dismissed from this
case now that it has deposited the insurance proceeds at issue into the Court’s registry.
Defendant Troy Jonas objects to the Plaintiff being dismissed; however, the Court already has
addressed and rejected—initially and on reconsideration—Jonas’s arguments regarding the
application of the Texas statutory interest rate and will not address them again here.1 The
Plaintiff has satisfied its obligation to deposit the insurance funds, and inasmuch as there are no
counterclaims pending against the Plaintiff, it is entitled to the dismissal it seeks. Accordingly,
the motion to dismiss (dkt. no. 65) is GRANTED and the Plaintiff is DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE.
1
The Court notes that Jonas curiously objects to the Plaintiff being dismissed “until such
time at [sic.] the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has made a
decision in this matter in the event the Court denies this objection and request for interest as
stated above and attorney fees.” Jonas Objection at 1. Until the Plaintiff is dismissed and final
judgment is entered, there would not appear to be any occasion for the Court of Appeals to make
a decision in this matter, as there would not be a final appealable order. The Court further notes
that Jonas incorrectly asserts in his Surreply to the instant motion—which was improperly filed
without leave of court—that his motion for summary judgment has not been addressed. It was
denied in Docket No. 42. Jonas moved to reconsider that ruling and that motion also was denied.
See Dkt. Nos. 45 and 46.
The Court will not enter final judgment at this time. Rather, the remaining Defendants—
Troy Jonas, V.J., T.A.J. and S.J.—shall either interplead and litigate among themselves or
stipulate as to the proper disposition of the funds being held by the Court. They shall be
prepared to discuss their intended course of action at the status conference scheduled on
December 18, 2013, with Magistrate Judge Dinsmore, and shall file the appropriate documents
within 45 days of the date of this Entry. Final judgment will be entered once the disposition of
the funds has been resolved.
In light of this ruling, the final pretrial conference scheduled for January 24, 2014, and
the trial scheduled for February 24, 2014, are VACATED, to be reset at the appropriate time if
necessary to resolve any claims asserted between the remaining Defendants.
SO ORDERED:
11/26/2013
_______________________________
Hon. William T. Lawrence, Judge
United States District Court
Southern District of Indiana
Copies to all counsel of record via electronic notification
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?