TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Lane v. Insurance Co. of North America

Mrs. Martha LANE v. INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA

Lane v. Ins. Co. of North Am., 268 F. Supp. 345 (E.D. Tenn. 1967)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
District Court, E.D. Tennessee · Federal District Courts
Decided
May 2, 1967
Docket
No. 5899
Judges
Taylor
Citations
268 F. Supp. 3451967 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8247

Opinion of the Court — Taylor

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

ORDER ROBERT L. TAYLOR, Chief Judge.

This a workmen’s compensation case. The plaintiff, a citizen and resident of Tennessee, brought suit, as the Tennessee statute permits, directly against the insurance company rather than against the insured, a Tennessee corporation. The defendant filed a motion to dismiss citing 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1332 (c) and the decision of this Court in Twin City Fire Insurance Co. v. Wilkerson, D.C., 247 F. Supp. 766 , construing this statute.

In the case of Carvin v. Standard Accident Insurance Company, 253 F.Supp. 232 (D.C.E.D.Tenn.), Judge Wilson referred to the Wilkerson case and stated that it “merely holds that a policy of fire insurance is not ‘a policy of liability insurance’ within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (c).”

In this case the insurer rather than the insured was sued under the language of the statute. Had the insured been sued there would have been no diversity of citizenship and there would have been no jurisdiction. The plaintiff has sought to do by indirection, that is by suit against the insurer, what he could not do directly. But the language of the statute covers this situation like a glove. The insurer was sued directly. Its insured was a citizen of Tennessee and by the terms of the statute, the insurer for purposes of the suit “ * * * shall be deemed a citizen of the State of which the insured is a citizen * * * ” In the opinion of the Court, there is clearly no diversity of citizenship.

It is ordered that the motion of defendant to dismiss the action be, and the same hereby is, granted.

The Court has been advised by Judge Frank Wilson of the United States District Court at Chattanooga, Tennessee, that he has had the same question in Vines v. United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company, 267 F.Supp. 436 , and reached the same decision.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1974: 11978: 11980: 11982: 119742026peak 1974 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. McMurry v. Prudential Property & Casualty Insurance458 F. Supp. 209 (E.D. Mich. 1978)
  2. Paz R. Hernandez v. The Travelers Insurance Company489 F.2d 721 (5th Cir. 1974)
  3. Ford Motor Company v. Insurance Company of North America669 F.2d 421 (6th Cir. 1982)
  4. A. J. Kellos Construction Co. v. Balboa Insurance495 F. Supp. 408 (S.D. Ga. 1980)

Most recent

  1. Ford Motor Company v. Insurance Company of North America669 F.2d 421 (6th Cir. 1982)
  2. A. J. Kellos Construction Co. v. Balboa Insurance495 F. Supp. 408 (S.D. Ga. 1980)
  3. McMurry v. Prudential Property & Casualty Insurance458 F. Supp. 209 (E.D. Mich. 1978)
  4. Paz R. Hernandez v. The Travelers Insurance Company489 F.2d 721 (5th Cir. 1974)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
Vines v. United States Fid. & Guar. Co., 267 F. Supp. 436 (E.D. Tenn. 1967) 19
Twin City Fire Ins. Co. v. Wilkerson, 247 F. Supp. 766 (E.D. Tenn. 1965) 17
Carvin ex rel. Thompson v. Standard Accident Ins., 253 F. Supp. 232 (E.D. Tenn. 1966) 15

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list