Trustmark Insurance Company v. Spruill et al

Filing 22

ORDER signed by Judge Pamela Pepper on 5/30/2018. 19 Plaintiff's motion for leave to deposit flexible adjustable life insurance policy proceeds GRANTED. EDWI Clerk of Court to accept check from plaintiff totaling at least $34,545.52, plu s interest accruing after 2/9/2018, for deposit into court registry investment system in an interest-bearing account; Clerk of Court to issue receipt once funds are deposited. 19 Plaintiff's motion for entry of discharge and dismissal order GR ANTED. Upon issuance of receipt by Clerk of Court, plaintiff to be discharged from further liability under flexible adjustable life insurance policy #ND0067 and dismissed from case with prejudice. Scheduling Conference set for 7/17/2018 at 10:30 AM by telephone before Judge Pamela Pepper; parties wishing to appear by phone may do so by calling the court's conference line at 888-557-8511 and using access code 4893665#. (cc: all counsel, via mail to defendants)(cb)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

TRUSTMARK INSURANCE COMPANY,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 17-cv-1808-pp

LAWRENCE SPRUILL, ERIC SPRUILL,
and BETTY JOHNSON,
Defendants.
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO DEPOSIT
FLEXIBLE PREMIUM ADJUSTABLE LIFE INSURANCE POLICY PROCEEDS
AND FOR ENTRY OF A DISCHARGE AND DISMISSAL ORDER (DKT. NO. 19)

Plaintiff Trustmark Insurance Company filed an interpleader complaint
asking the court to rule on the competing claims of Margaret Spruill’s two
surviving sons and her sister. Dkt. No. 1. On February 20, 2018, the plaintiff
filed a motion for leave to deposit1 $34,545.52, which consists of a $33,671
death benefit under Spruill’s Flexible Premium Adjustable Life Insurance Policy
No. ND0067, and interest in the amount of $874.52. At this stage, all of the
defendants have been served and have appeared in this action. No one has
objected to the motion.

The plaintiff requests leave to “deposit these funds plus any additional
interest with the Clerk of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of
Illinois in an interest bearing account” (emphasis added). Dkt. No. 19 at 2. The
court assumes that the plaintiff intends to deposit the funds in this district.
1

1

I.

Jurisdiction
The plaintiff filed the complaint under 28 U.S.C. §1335 and Federal Rule

of Civil Procedure 22. The Federal Interpleader Act grants district courts
jurisdiction over cases in which (1) the plaintiff has in its custody cash or
property in excess of $500, (2) at least two or more of the adverse claimants
have diverse citizenship, and (3) the plaintiff has deposited the property or its
value with the court. 28 U.S.C. § 1335(a). Rule 22 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure is a procedural device which does not, by itself, grant the court
subject matter jurisdiction. Fed. R. Civ. P. 22. Complete diversity is a
prerequisite for Rule 22 interpleader.
The plaintiff has established the statutory amount in controversy. For
both the statute and the rule, the plaintiff must show diversity exists between
at least two claimants to the fund. The plaintiff is an Illinois corporation with a
principal place of business in Illinois. Defendant Lawrence Spruill resides in
Kenosha County, Wisconsin, and Betty Johnson resides in St. Louis County,
Missouri. The plaintiff does not know the state of domicile for defendant Eric
Spruill. Dkt. No. 1 at 2. Statutory interpleader, however, requires only minimal
diversity. The provision has been uniformly construed to require only diversity
between two or more claimants without regard to the circumstance that other
rival claimants may be co-citizens. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Tashire, 386
U.S. 523, 530 (1967). The plaintiff has established minimal diversity.
The third requirement—that the funds be deposited with the court—is
the subject of the pending motion.
2

II.

Motion to Deposit Funds
An interpleader case typically proceeds in two stages. First the court

determines whether the interpleader is warranted. Second, the court resolves
the merits of the claim. Aaron v. Mahl, 550 F.3d 659, 663 (7th Cir. 2008). This
motion relates to the first stage—whether interpleader is warranted. The
plaintiff has asked for leave to deposit $34,545.52 with the clerk of court
because of the completing claims of Margaret Spruill’s surviving sons and
sister. The court will order the interpleader plaintiff to deposit the funds in the
court’s registry investment system in an interest-bearing account.
III.

Conclusion
The court GRANTS the plaintiff’s motion for leave to deposit flexible

adjustable life insurance policy proceeds. Dkt. No. 19. The court DIRECTS the
clerk of court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin to accept a check from the
plaintiff in the total sum of at least $34,545.52, plus any additional interest
that accrues after February 9, 2018, for deposit into the court registry
investment system in an interest-bearing account. The court DIRECTS the
clerk of court to issue a receipt once the plaintiff deposits the funds.
The court GRANTS the plaintiff’s motion for entry of a discharge and
dismissal order. Dkt. No. 19. The court ORDERS that, upon issuance of the
receipt by the clerk of court, the plaintiff shall be discharged from further
liability under Flexible Premium Adjustable Life Insurance Policy No. ND0067,
and shall be dismissed from this case with prejudice.

3

The court ORDERS the defendants to appear by telephone for a
scheduling conference on July 17, 2018 at 10:30 a.m. Parties may appear by
telephone by calling the court’s conference line at 888-557-8511 and using
access code 4893665#.
Dated in Milwaukee, Wisconsin this 30th day of May, 2018.
BY THE COURT:
_____________________________________
HON. PAMELA PEPPER
United States District Judge

4