Plaintiff filed suit, settled for $87,487.85 , and then secured a final judgment in State Court. Later, when plaintiff sought to garnish the insurance policy, the insurer removed the action to federal court. Plaintiff sought to remand the case to State court, citing 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1), which provides that in a direct action against an insurer not joined as a party defendant, the insurer is deemed a citizen of the State of the insured; this would negate diversity. The court held that a garnishment is not a direct action as contemplated in section 1332 and that 1332 applies when the injured party is entitled to sue the insurer without having first obtained a judgment against the insured. Plaintiff’s motion to remand was denied. Same result in Estate of Davis v. Magnolia Healthcare, Inc., 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43129 (D. Miss. 2006).
The word disability doesn't have the same meaning in all contexts. If you have a…
On October 10, 2024, the Social Security Administration announced that Americans will increase a 2.5…
Many people think that estate planning is just having documents prepared. They have a lawyer…
In Chambers v. Edwards, 365 Ga. App. 482 (2022), William Chambers sued his sister, Kathy…
When an injured party sues someone who negligently injured him or her, one form of…
From time to time we re-post David Hultstrom's Financial Foundations. Mr. Hultstrom, who is a…