724 F.2d 82 (8th Cir. 1983), 83-1663, Anderson v. Home Ins. Co.

Docket Nº:83-1663.
Citation:724 F.2d 82
Party Name:Larry Roland ANDERSON, Appellant, v. The HOME INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.
Case Date:December 28, 1983
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

Page 82

724 F.2d 82 (8th Cir. 1983)

Larry Roland ANDERSON, Appellant,

v.

The HOME INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 83-1663.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit

December 28, 1983

Submitted Dec. 20, 1983.

Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc

Denied Feb. 8, 1984.

Page 83

Larry Roland Anderson, pro se.

Ben J. Weinberger, St. Louis, Mo., for appellant.

Daniel T. Rabbitt, Charles E. Reis, IV, Brown, James & Rabbitt, P.C., St. Louis, Mo., for appellee, Home Ins. Co.

Before HENLEY, Senior Circuit Judge, and JOHN R. GIBSON and FAGG, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a dismissal by the district court under Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(b)(2)(C) for failure to answer interrogatories. Acting pro se, Larry Roland Anderson sued the Home Insurance Company in state court on an insurance policy, alleging libel and wrongful denial of a claim. Home Insurance had refused to indemnify his claimed fire loss, citing a finding of arson and Anderson's failure to document his insured property. Anderson amended the complaint adding as a defendant his insurance agent, Paul H. Politte, Inc., and thereby destroying diversity jurisdiction. Nevertheless, Home Insurance petitioned for removal to the United States District Court under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1441, alleging fraudulent joinder. The District Court found the joinder to be fraudulent, allowed removal under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1441, assumed jurisdiction under

Page 84

28 U.S.C. Sec. 1332, and dismissed Anderson's claim against Politte for misjoinder under Fed.R.Civ.P. 21.

Home Insurance subsequently propounded interrogatories which Anderson failed to answer. The district court ordered Anderson to answer under Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(a). After a month without response from Anderson and four months after the filing of the interrogatories, the district court, under Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(b)(2)(C), dismissed the complaint with prejudice for failure to comply with its order. We affirm.

Anderson argues first that the district court improperly assumed jurisdiction on removal from the state court and improperly dismissed Politte. Joinder designed solely to deprive federal courts of jurisdiction is fraudulent and will not prevent removal. Tedder v. F.M.C. Corp., 590 F.2d 115, 117 (5th Cir.1979). Fraudulent joinder exists if, on the face of plaintiff's state court pleadings, no cause of action lies against the resident...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP
124 practice notes
  • 158 F.R.D. 632 (N.D.Iowa 1994), C 92-4082, Tyler v. Iowa State Trooper Badge No. 297
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 8th Circuit
    • 30 November 1994
    ...claim or defense. Id. Sanctions may be imposed upon a pro se litigant for failure to cooperate in discovery. Anderson v. Home Ins. Co., 724 F.2d 82, 84 (8th Cir.1983). In Anderson, the pro se litigant had failed for four months to respond to discovery requests and failed to do so for anothe......
  • 851 F.Supp. 1430 (D.S.D. 1994), Civ. 94-5009, Federal Beef Processors, Inc. v. CBS Inc.
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 8th Circuit District of South Dakota
    • 3 May 1994
    ...claim against the challenged defendant. Carriere v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 893 F.2d 98, 100 (5th Cir.1990); Anderson v. Home Ins. Co., 724 F.2d 82, 84 (8th Cir.1983) (per curiam); Schwenn, 822 F.Supp. at 1455. The burden of proving fraudulent joinder rests on the defendant invoking the C......
  • 222 F.R.D. 362 (D.Minn. 2004), Civ. 01-1980(DSD/SRN), Rottlund Co., Inc. v. Pinnacle Corp.
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 8th Circuit District of Minnesota
    • 30 June 2004
    ...the plaintiffs." ); Shelton v. Am. Motors. Corp., 805 F.2d 1323, 1330 (8th Cir.1986) (default judgment); Anderson v. Home Ins. Co., 724 F.2d 82, 84 (8th Cir.1983) (dismissal); Lorin Corp. v. Goto & Co., Ltd., 700 F.2d 1202, 1207-08 (8th Cir.1983) (dismissal); Savola v. Webster, 644......
  • 78 F.Supp.2d 885 (W.D.Ark. 1999), Civ. 99-3085, Kohl v. American Home Products Corp.
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 8th Circuit Western District of Arkansas
    • 29 December 1999
    ...designed solely to deprive federal courts of jurisdiction is fraudulent and will not prevent removal." Anderson v. Home Ins. Co., 724 F.2d 82, 84 (8th Cir.1983) ( citing Tedder v. F.M.C. Corp., 590 F.2d 115, 117 (5th Cir.1979)). The doctrine of fraudulent joinder is designed to prevent......
  • Free signup to view additional results
122 cases
  • 158 F.R.D. 632 (N.D.Iowa 1994), C 92-4082, Tyler v. Iowa State Trooper Badge No. 297
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 8th Circuit
    • 30 November 1994
    ...claim or defense. Id. Sanctions may be imposed upon a pro se litigant for failure to cooperate in discovery. Anderson v. Home Ins. Co., 724 F.2d 82, 84 (8th Cir.1983). In Anderson, the pro se litigant had failed for four months to respond to discovery requests and failed to do so for anothe......
  • 851 F.Supp. 1430 (D.S.D. 1994), Civ. 94-5009, Federal Beef Processors, Inc. v. CBS Inc.
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 8th Circuit District of South Dakota
    • 3 May 1994
    ...claim against the challenged defendant. Carriere v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 893 F.2d 98, 100 (5th Cir.1990); Anderson v. Home Ins. Co., 724 F.2d 82, 84 (8th Cir.1983) (per curiam); Schwenn, 822 F.Supp. at 1455. The burden of proving fraudulent joinder rests on the defendant invoking the C......
  • 222 F.R.D. 362 (D.Minn. 2004), Civ. 01-1980(DSD/SRN), Rottlund Co., Inc. v. Pinnacle Corp.
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 8th Circuit District of Minnesota
    • 30 June 2004
    ...the plaintiffs." ); Shelton v. Am. Motors. Corp., 805 F.2d 1323, 1330 (8th Cir.1986) (default judgment); Anderson v. Home Ins. Co., 724 F.2d 82, 84 (8th Cir.1983) (dismissal); Lorin Corp. v. Goto & Co., Ltd., 700 F.2d 1202, 1207-08 (8th Cir.1983) (dismissal); Savola v. Webster, 644......
  • 78 F.Supp.2d 885 (W.D.Ark. 1999), Civ. 99-3085, Kohl v. American Home Products Corp.
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 8th Circuit Western District of Arkansas
    • 29 December 1999
    ...designed solely to deprive federal courts of jurisdiction is fraudulent and will not prevent removal." Anderson v. Home Ins. Co., 724 F.2d 82, 84 (8th Cir.1983) ( citing Tedder v. F.M.C. Corp., 590 F.2d 115, 117 (5th Cir.1979)). The doctrine of fraudulent joinder is designed to prevent......
  • Free signup to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • Should the Eighth Circuit recognize procedural misjoinder?
    • United States
    • South Dakota Law Review Vol. 53 Nbr. 1, March 2008
    • 22 March 2008
    ...811. (33.) Id. at 810. (34.) Id. (35.) Wiles v. Capitol Indem. Corp., 280 F.3d 868, 871 (8th Cir. 2002) (citing Anderson v. Home Ins. Co., 724 F.2d 82, 84 (8th Cir. 1983)). (36.) Filla, 336 F.3d at 810. (37.) Anderson, 724 F.2d at 84. See also Great N. Ry. Co. v. Alexander, 246 U.S. 276, 28......
  • From proxy to principle: fraudulent joinder reconsidered.
    • United States
    • Albany Law Review Vol. 69 Nbr. 4, September 2006
    • 22 September 2006
    ...647 (5th Cir. 2003)). (294) Id. (295) Id. at 808. (296) Id. (297) Id. (298) See id. (299) Id. at 810 (quoting Anderson v. Home Ins. Co., 724 F.2d 82, 84 (8th Cir. (300) Id. (301) Id. at 811 ("We agree that under Missouri law a reasonable basis exists for predicting that liability might......