Ballard v. Mutual Life Ins. Co. of New York

Decision Date27 January 1940
Docket NumberNo. 9197.,9197.
PartiesBALLARD et al. v. MUTUAL LIFE INS. CO. OF NEW YORK.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit

Chester H. Ferguson, of Tampa, Fla., and Frederick H. Mellor, of Fort Myers, Fla., for appellants.

Robt. W. Shackleford, of Tampa, Fla., for appellee.

Before SIBLEY, HUTCHESON, and HOLMES, Circuit Judges.

HOLMES, Circuit Judge.

This appeal is (1) from an order denying appellants' motion to dismiss appellee's complaint in an original action for a declaratory judgment, and (2) from an order in an ancillary proceeding granting a temporary injunction restraining the prosecution by appellants of two civil actions in the state courts of Florida.

The order overruling the motion to dismiss the original action is not a final judgment or decree from which an appeal is allowed to this court. Therefore, the appeal from such an order should be, and hereby is, dismissed.1

The appeal from the order granting a temporary injunction is properly before us and presents two questions: (1) whether the amount in controversy was sufficient to give the district court jurisdiction, and (2) whether the issuance of the injunction may be upheld.

The original complaint in the court below, filed by appellee, sought a declaratory judgment to determine the rights and legal relations between the parties under two insurance policies, with particular reference to waivers of premiums and payments of disability benefits on account of insured's alleged total and permanent disability. The policies were on the life of Elmo M. Ballard for $5,000 and $10,000, respectively, with certain provisions for waivers of premiums and for disability benefit payments at the rate of $10 a month for each $1,000 of insurance, as defined and set forth therein.

It is suggested that the federal district court was without jurisdiction to grant the interlocutory injunction in this case, because the sum of the amounts involved in both cases in the state courts was less than $3,000, but that is not the test of jurisdiction in this proceeding. We look to the original suit in the federal court, and, if the amount there is sufficient, the jurisdiction in the main case will support the ancillary jurisdiction in the federal court without reference to the amount in controversy in the latter proceeding.2

The declaratory action originally instituted by appellee (now pending in the court below) sought to relieve the plaintiff from the claim of the insured that he was entitled to receive disability payments and to have the policies maintained in force under the disability provisions thereof without payment of premiums thereon. This claim (from the asserted liability for which the plaintiff asked to be relieved) was alleged to be in excess of $3,000, and, since the insured is only forty-two years of age, has a reasonable life expectancy of many years, and is alleged to be totally and permanently disabled, it appears to us that the value of his claim is not overstated. The amount in controversy is the value of the claim which the company is seeking to have cancelled in the court below, not the amounts sued for in the state courts. Accordingly, the suggestion of lack of jurisdiction in the court below to issue the temporary injunction is overruled.3

The final question is whether the appellee had the equitable right to enjoin the further prosecution of the two cases in the state courts, both of which had been filed before the action for a declaratory judgment was instituted in the federal court. W...

To continue reading

Request your trial
29 cases
  • Garrett v. Hoffman
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    • 2 de novembro de 1977
    ...Cas. Co. v. Pacific Coal & Gas Co., 312 U.S. 270, 274, 61 S.Ct. 510, 85 L.Ed. 826 (1941) (by implication); Ballard v. Mutual Life Ins. Co., 109 F.2d 388, 390 (5th Cir. 1940); Rosenstiel v. Rosenstiel, 278 F.Supp. 794, 801 (S.D.N.Y.1967); 1A Moore's Federal Practice ¶ 0.220, at 2604 n. 11 (2......
  • Drexler v. Walters
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Minnesota
    • 23 de setembro de 1968
    ...Co. v. Owens, 189 F.2d 505 (9th Cir. 1951), cert. denied 342 U.S. 905, 72 S.Ct. 294, 96 L.Ed. 677 (1952); Ballard v. Mutual Life Ins. Co. of New York, 109 F.2d 388 (5th Cir. 1940); Javelin Oil Co. v. T. C. Morrow Drilling Co., 266 F.Supp. 119 (W.D.La.1967); Rockefeller v. First Nat'l Bank o......
  • Wacker v. Bisson
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • 22 de outubro de 1965
    ...that an executory judgment was obtainable." Borchard, Declaratory Judgments (2d ed. 1941) at 316.15 See also Ballard v. Mutual Life Ins. Co. of New York, 5 Cir. 1940, 109 F.2d 388; Allen v. American Fidelity & Casualty Co., 5 Cir. 1935, 80 F.2d 458; Carpenter v. Edmondson, 5 Cir. 1937, 92 F......
  • Freund Motor Co. v. Alma Realty & Inv. Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • 3 de julho de 1940
    ... ... 144, 198 N.E. 301. (2) ... State ex rel. National Life Ins. Co. v. Allen, 301 ... Mo. 631, 256 S.W. 737. (3) The ... their true meaning. New York Central R. R. Co. v ... Stoneman, 233 Mass. 258, 123 N.E ... Co. v. Koch (C. C. A. 3), 102 F.2d 288; ... Ballard v. Mutual Life Ins. Co. of New York (C. C. A ... 5), 109 ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT