FIRST FED. S. & L. ASS'N OF BOWLING GREEN, KY. v. McReynolds
Decision Date | 17 April 1969 |
Docket Number | No. 1326.,1326. |
Citation | 297 F. Supp. 1159 |
Parties | FIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION OF BOWLING GREEN, KENTUCKY, Plaintiff, v. H. Earl McREYNOLDS, Defendant. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Kentucky |
Bell, Orr & Reynolds, by Jerry Moore, Bowling Green, Ky., for plaintiff.
J. Granville Clark, Russellville, Ky., for defendant.
Plaintiff seeks a declaration that its employment contract with defendant is void under the regulations promulgated by the Federal Home Loan Bank Board pursuant to section 1464 of Title 12, United States Code, and alleges that this court has jurisdiction under section 1331 of Title 28. Defendant has moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter and has counterclaimed for damages for breach of the employment contract which plaintiff alleges in its Complaint to be void under federal law.
This court is presented with a situation where a plaintiff seeks a declaration that he is immune, because of a federal right, from a non-federal cause of action which the defendant may have (and which he has asserted by Counter-claim). In such a situation, there are two possible views. See 1 Barron & Holtzoff (Wright), Federal Practice and Procedure, sec. 39, pp. 209-211; Note, Federal Question Jurisdiction and the Declaratory Judgment Act, 55 Ky.L.J. 150. These two views stem from the well-established rule that the existence of a federal question must appear on the face of the plaintiff's well-pleaded complaint, and that it cannot be dependent on anticipation of defenses which the defendant may later assert. The two views are stated in Barron & Holtzoff, supra at 209:
Under the first view, this court would have subject matter jurisdiction in the instant case. But under the second view, this court would have no jurisdiction.
It is axiomatic that the Declaratory Judgment Act cannot be used to give relief indirectly which cannot be given directly. The statute is procedural and does not supply an independent ground of jurisdiction. Skelly Oil Co. v. Phillips Co., 339 U.S. 667, 671, 70 S.Ct. 876, 94 L.Ed. 1194; Rolls-Royce Limited v. United States, 364 F.2d 415, 419, 176 Ct.Cl. 694; Mayer v. Ordman, 6 Cir., 391 F.2d 889, 892. Although the "broad view" may have the merit of simplicity, this court is persuaded by the dicta in Skelly Oil Co. v. Phillips Co., supra, 339 U.S. at 671-674, 70 S.Ct. 876. In that case the Court, after noting the legislative trend to contract the jurisdiction of the federal courts, said:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Tape Industries Association of America v. Younger
...Mottley, 211 U.S. 149, 29 S.Ct. 42, 53 L. Ed. 126 (1908); and First Federal Savings and Loan Assoc. of Bowling Green, Kentucky v. McReynolds, 297 F.Supp. 1159 (W.D.Ky.1969). Yet even if all the other prerequisites for civil rights and Federal Question jurisdiction are present, a major diffi......
-
Chandler v. O'BRYAN
...(emphasis added). See also, Skelly Oil Co. v. Phillips Petroleum Co., 339 U.S. 667, 70 S.Ct. 876 (1950); First Federal S. & L. Assoc. v. McReynolds, 297 F.Supp. 1159 (W.D. Ky.1969); Government Employees Ins. Co. v. LeBleu, 272 F.Supp. 421 (E.D.La. This principle has direct applicability to ......
-
McCorkle v. First Pennsylvania Banking and Trust Co.
...Resources v. Oroville-Wyandotte Irrigation District, 409 F.2d 532, 535 (9th Cir. 1969); First Federal Savings and Loan Ass'n of Bowling Green, Ky. v. McReynolds, 297 F.Supp. 1159 (D.C.Ky.1969); Gov't Employees Insurance Co. v. LeBeu, 272 F.Supp. 421, 427-428 Here it is manifest that the "th......
-
NGS American v. Jefferson
...courts the adjudication of causes properly cognizable by state courts) (emphasis added); First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n of Bowling Green, Ky. v. McReynolds, 297 F. Supp. 1159, 1161 (W.D. Ky. 1969) (noting that the Declaratory Judgment Act does not permit a party to invoke the jurisdiction of ......