Transamerica Premier Life Insurance Company v. Roldan, et al

Filing 19

ORDER granting in part and denying in part plaintiff's 12 Motion for Interpleader Relief, Attorney's Fees and Dismissal; pltf's request for interpleader relief is GRANTED and pltf is DISMISSED; pltf's request for attorney's fees and costs is DENIED. Defendants-in-Interpleader Roldan, Turpin, and Chatelain are ORDERED to file briefs within 45 days re claims by Judge Marsha J. Pechman. (PM) cc: Roldan, Chatelain, and Turpin

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

8
9
10

TRANSAMERICA PREMIER LIFE
INSURANCE COMPANY,

11
Plaintiff,
12
v.

CASE NO. C15-277 MJP
ORDER GRANTING IN PART,
DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR INTERPLEADER
RELIEF

13
VICKIE DARLENE ROLDAN, et al.,
14
Defendants.
15
16
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Plaintiff-in-Interpleader Transamerica
17
Premier Life Insurance Company’s Motion for Interpleader Relief, Attorney’s Fees, and
18
Dismissal. (Dkt. No. 12.) Having considered the Parties’ briefing and the related record, the
19
Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part the motion. Plaintiff’s request for interpleader relief
20
is GRANTED and Plaintiff is hereby DISMISSED from this action. Plaintiff’s request for
21
attorney’s fees and costs is DENIED. Defendants-in-Interpleader Roldan, Turpin, and Chatelain
22
are ORDERED to interplead their claims to the insurance proceeds at issue, as explained in more
23
detail below. The Court issues a permanent injunction preventing Defendants from proceeding
24
ORDER GRANTING IN PART, DENYING IN
PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
INTERPLEADER RELIEF- 1

1 with any claim against Transamerica or its predecessors or successors with respect to their
2 entitlement to the insurance policy benefits at issue.
3
4

Background
This action concerns a life insurance policy (Certificate Number 010XC98895) issued by

5 Transamerica’s predecessor to Darlene Brown, with a face value of $5,070.00. (Dkt. Nos. 1, 2.)
6 Darlene Brown died on October 6, 2014, and Transamerica became obligated to pay the face
7 value of the policy and a partial premium refund to the proper beneficiary. Transamerica
8 received competing claims to the benefits of the policy from Defendants Chatelain and Roldan.
9 Defendant Turpin did not submit a claim, though Transamerica suspects he may be entitled to do
10 so. Transamerica then instituted this interpleader action seeking judicial resolution of the dispute
11 as well as an injunction preventing Defendants from bringing separate suits against
12 Transamerica.
13

Transamerica now moves the court for an order compelling Defendants to interplead their

14 claims to the policy benefits, dismissing Transamerica from the case, and enjoining Defendants.
15 (Dkt. No. 12.)
16

Discussion

17

I.

18

In an interpleader action, the “stakeholder” of a sum of money sues all those who might

Interpleader Relief

19 have claim to the money, deposits the money in the Court’s registry, and lets the claimants
20 litigate who is entitled to the money. Cripps v. Life Ins. Co. of N. Am., 980 F.2d 1261, 1265
21 (9th Cir. 1992). 28 U.S.C. § 1335 provides for federal jurisdiction over interpleader actions in
22 which any two claimants to the fund are of diverse citizenship and there is $500 or more at stake.
23 Once the action has been initiated, the Court may dismiss the stakeholder from the case and
24
ORDER GRANTING IN PART, DENYING IN
PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
INTERPLEADER RELIEF- 2

1 enjoin the claimants from separately suing the stakeholder over the same policy benefits. 28
2 U.S.C. § 2361.
3

The Court finds that Transamerica is entitled to interpleader relief. Here, the fund

4 exceeds $500 and has been deposited in the Court’s registry, and the three potential claimants are
5 of diverse citizenship: Defendant Roldan is a citizen of Washington, Defendant Chatelain is a
6 citizen of Colorado, and Defendant Turpin is a citizen of Kansas. Accordingly, Transamerica’s
7 Motion for Interpleader Relief is GRANTED and Transamerica is DISMISSED from the case.
8

Defendants Roldan, Chatelain, and Turpin are hereby ORDERED to interplead their

9 claims to the insurance policy benefits. To do so, each Defendant should submit a brief of no
10 more than ten (10) pages to the Court that sets forth why he or she is entitled to the money under
11 the policy. The briefs should be submitted no later than forty-five (45) days after the date of
12 this order. Failure to file a brief with the Court in response to this order may be considered by
13 the Court as signifying that you do not claim the policy benefits. If Defendants require an
14 extension of time to file their briefs, or would like to request other relief from the Court,
15 Defendants should request an extension in writing by filing a motion with the Court. The Court
16 directs Defendants to the Western District of Washington’s Pro Se Guide for litigants who are
17 proceeding without an attorney, available on the Court’s website at
18 http://www.wawd.uscourts.gov/pro-se, for instructions on how to file their briefs and other
19 motions, and for other useful information.
20

Defendant Roldan has written to the Court regarding Transamerica’s motion for

21 interpleader relief. (Dkt. No. 15.) Defendant Roldan may choose to submit a second brief
22 setting forth her entitlement to the policy benefits, according to the guidelines discussed above, if
23
24
ORDER GRANTING IN PART, DENYING IN
PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
INTERPLEADER RELIEF- 3

1 she wishes. If Defendant Roldan chooses not to submit a second brief, her first letter will be
2 considered by the Court when determining who is entitled to the policy benefits.
3

II.

4

After consideration of the type and amount of investigative and legal work performed by

Attorney’s Fees and Costs

5 Transamerica, the small size of the fund at issue, and Defendant Roldan’s opposition to a fee
6 award, the Court finds that an award of attorney’s fees and costs is neither warranted nor in the
7 interest of justice in this case. Resolving disputed claims is “part of the ordinary course of
8 business for an insurance company,” and the Court will not transfer the ordinary costs of doing
9 business to the claimants under a disputed policy simply because the insurer brought an
10 interpleader action. Mutual of Omaha v. Dalby, 531 F.Supp. 511, 517 (E.D. Pa. 1982).
11 Defendant’s request for attorney’s fees and costs is DENIED.
12

Conclusion

13

The Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part the motion. Plaintiff’s request for

14 interpleader relief is GRANTED and Plaintiff is hereby DISMISSED from this action.
15 Plaintiff’s request for attorney’s fees and costs is DENIED. Defendants-in-Interpleader Roldan,
16 Turpin, and Chatelain are ORDERED to interplead their claims to the insurance proceeds at
17 issue according to the procedure outlined above, the briefs to be filed no later than forty-five (45)
18 days after the date of this order. Defendants are hereby permanently enjoined from separately
19 suing Transamerica with respect to their entitlement to the insurance policy benefits at issue.
20

The clerk is ORDERED to provide copies of this order to all counsel and to Defendants

21 Roldan, Chatelain, and Turpin.
22

/

23

/

24
ORDER GRANTING IN PART, DENYING IN
PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
INTERPLEADER RELIEF- 4

1

Dated this 14th day of August, 2015.

2

4

A

5

Marsha J. Pechman
Chief United States District Judge

3

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
ORDER GRANTING IN PART, DENYING IN
PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
INTERPLEADER RELIEF- 5