Battle v. Liberty Nat. Life Ins. Co.
| Citation | 660 F. Supp. 1449 |
| Decision Date | 22 May 1987 |
| Docket Number | No. CV70-H-752-S.,CV70-H-752-S. |
| Parties | Edgar H. BATTLE, d/b/a Edgar H. Battle Funeral Home, et al., Plaintiffs, v. LIBERTY NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, et al., Defendants. Aubrey CARR, et al., Petitioners, v. James L. TAYLOR, as the Adm., etc.; James L. Taylor; Frances Louis Taylor Spence; Debra Taylor; Diane Taylor Stafford; Phillip Taylor and Gretta Taylor; and Annie Jo Elrod, as Executrix, etc.; Annie Jo Elrod and Gladys J. Carroll, Respondents. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Alabama |
Francis H. Hare, Jr., Hare Wynn Newell & Newton, Birmingham, Ala.
Edward L. Hardin, Jr., Birmingham, Ala.
John S.P. Samford, Birmingham, Ala.
Andrew Campbell, Leitman Siegal & Payne, Birmingham, Ala.
Jack Drake, Drake & Knowles, University, Ala.
David M. Ensley, Nolen & Ensley, Fayette, Ala.
J. Pelham Ferrell, Ferrell & Bennett, Phenix City, Ala.
Richard H. Gill, Copeland Franco Screws Gill, Montgomery, Ala.
O. William Adams, III, Birmingham, Ala.
John Crawley, Troy, Ala.
Edward Still, Birmingham, Ala.
J. Richard Carr, Attalla, Ala.
Alto V. Lee, III, Lee & McInish, Dothan, Ala.
Duncan Manley, Rives & Peterson, Birmingham, Ala.
Fred D. Gray, Gray Seay & Langford, Tusketee, Ala.
Ralph B. Tate, Spain Gillon Riley Tate & Etheredge, Birmingham, Ala.
Ira Burleson, Birmingham, Ala.
Edmon McKinley, Thomasville, Ala.
Ernest C. Hornsby, Hornsby & Schmitt, Tallassee, Ala.
Don B. Long, Jr., William D. Jones, III, Johnston Barton Proctor Swedlaw & Naff, Birmingham, Ala.
George R. Stuart, III, Birmingham, Ala.
Frank J. Tipler, Andalusia, Ala.
C. Neal Pope, Phenix City, Ala.
Warren B. Lightfoot, William R. Lucas, Jr., Adam K. Peck, Bradley Arant Rose & White, Birmingham, Ala.
Thomas A. Ansley, Haskell Slaughter & Young, Birmingham, Ala.
Jimmy E. Alexander, Athens, Ala.
John W. Parker, Tonsmeire McFadden & Riley, Mobile, Ala.
William C. Barclift, Liberty Nat. Life Ins. Co., Birmingham, Ala.
George P. Walthall, Jr., Walthall & Cleveland, Prattville, Ala.
James E. Clark, Birmingham, Ala.
This cause is before the court on the November 6, 1986 motion of James L. Taylor and others (respondents) to dissolve the March 26, 1985 preliminary injunction and on the February 4, 1987 petition of Liberty National Life Insurance Company and Aubrey Carr (petitioners) to make that injunction permanent. Under the February 6, 1987 order the motion and petition were heard and submitted at the March 12, 1987 hearing. The entire body of evidence in support of and in opposition to the motion and petition was presented by affidavits and exhibits, and both respondents and petitioners filed several briefs with the court. It is this court's decision, following full consideration and review of the various issues to be resolved, that the preliminary injunction issued March 26, 1985, should in essence be made permanent. The following exposition of the Battle and associated cases, as well as the reasoning used in the instant decision, will hopefully illuminate the quagmire of litigation in which the court and parties are submerged, illustrating the complexity, seriousness and all consuming nature of the issues which have been, are, and necessarily will in the future continue to be in litigation in this court.
Edgar H. Battle, et al., v. Liberty National Life Ins. Co., et al., CV70-H-752-S, was filed in this court on October 6, 1970. It was a suit by owners of funeral home businesses in Alabama against the defendants seeking damages and other relief for alleged violations of the federal antitrust statutes. W. Adrian Holman, et al., v. Liberty National Life Ins. Co., et al., CV76-H-0813-S, was filed in this court on June 11, 1976. It also was a suit by owners of funeral home businesses in Alabama against the same defendants claiming the same violations and requesting the same relief as in Battle. Holman purported to be a class action on behalf of all persons and entities owning funeral home businesses in Alabama from June 29, 1954 through its disposition date. James A. Campbell, et al., v. Liberty National Life Ins. Co., et al., CV72-H-569-S, was filed in this court on June 26, 1972, as a class action on behalf of all holders of burial and/or vault insurance policies issued, assumed, or reinsured by Liberty National. In substantially the same language as Battle, Campbell claimed alleged violations of the federal antitrust laws and also invoked the pendente lite jurisdiction of this court in counts of misrepresentation and fraud with respect to burial and vault insurance policies issued, assumed, or reinsured by Liberty National. Each of these suits complained of federal antitrust violations by Liberty National and Brown-Service Funeral Homes Company, Inc. in the sale, issue and performance of the insurance policies in question in the State of Alabama.
In September, 1977, counsel for the named plaintiffs and plaintiff-intervenors in these three suits and counsel for the defendants entered into an Agreement in Principle for Disposition of Litigation and presented the same to the court. All counsel for the named parties moved for consolidation of the three suits to accomplish the disposition of the litigation in accordance with the settlement agreement, and the cases were consolidated under the style Battle v. Liberty National Life Ins. Co., CV70-H-752-S, on September 22, 1977. Following a hearing on the settlement agreement, this court tentatively approved the agreement and, as there had been no formal order concerning the maintainability of the suits as class actions, established two temporary settlement classes to effectuate the settlement agreement. The first temporary class consisted of all owners of funeral home businesses in Alabama at any time from June 29, 1954 until the date of the order (September 22, 1977). This court specifically found that the prerequisites of Rule 23(a) and of Rule 23(b)(3) were met by this first class, that the class representatives adequately protected the interests of all class members, that all class members' names and addresses could be ascertained through reasonable effort, and that the best notice practicable for them was written notice by mail. The second temporary class was composed of "all insureds under outstanding burial or vault insurance policies issued, assumed, or reinsured by defendant Liberty National Life Insurance Company and all other persons claiming any right, title or interest in or benefit under any such policy." (September 22, 1977 order). This court specifically found that this second class met the prerequisites of Rule 23(a), including the adequacy of representation, that it also met the prerequisites of Rule 23(b)(2), that the number of class members exceeded one million, and that members' names could not be ascertained through reasonable effort. The best notice practicable for this second class was determined to be written notice delivered by agents of Liberty National as provided in the September 22, 1977 order.
On December 9, 1977, the consolidated action came on for a hearing on the settlement agreement after notice to the parties. On January 6, 1978, a final judgment was entered which made permanent the temporary classes established on September 22, 1977, and which found, inter alia, that: (1) this court had subject matter and in personam jurisdiction over all issues and parties, (2) the terms and provisions of the Settlement Agreement were reasonable and should be approved (citing various advantages to all parties), (3) all claims asserted or which might have been asserted by the parties or class members should be dismissed with prejudice, (4) Johnson v. Liberty National Life Ins. Co., #5178, then pending in the Circuit Court of Conecuh County, Alabama, involved the same policy-holder class and common questions of law and fact as involved in Battle and should be dismissed with prejudice, and (5) the best practicable notice to all parties and class members had been attained by the methods ordered on September 22, 1977, and by widespread multimedia news coverage of the settlement agreement and hearings.
The following excerpt from this court's March 26, 1985 order of preliminary injunction (pp. 5-7) illuminates the magnitude of effort that culminated in the January 6, 1978 Final Judgment.
As the record quite clearly establishes, the January 6, 1978 FRCP 54(b) Final Judgment was the culmination of seven years of litigation in state court and in federal court of very complex and interdependent issues between parties with positions which often conflicted with one another. These issues include: (1) our nation's policies embraced in the federal antitrust laws (with regard to which this court's jurisdiction was initially invoked in this action on October 6, 1970), including specifically the provisions of a final judgment entered in this court on June 29, 1954, in an antitrust action styled United States of America v. Liberty National Life Insurance Company, et al., Civil Action No. 7719; (2) the rights and responsibilities of some 300 owners and operators of over 400 funeral homes located throughout the state; (3) the rights of over 1,000,000 holders of a variety of burial and vault insurance policies issued, assumed or reinsured by Liberty National, the obligations of Liberty National thereunder, and the various options available to Liberty National to discharge those obligations, e.g., the use of existing funeral homes in the state to service indirectly the policies or the establishment by Liberty National of outlets throughout the state to service directly the policies; and (4) the rights and responsibilities between Liberty National and the over 300 funeral directors throughout the state (authorized and unauthorized) with regard to the servicing of the policies of insurance and with regard to the opportunity to service them. The basic resolution of those issues was accomplished by the Final Judgment...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Battle v. Liberty Nat. Life Ins. Co.
...willingness to entertain a Rule 60(b) motion attacking the final judgment on due process grounds. Battle v. Liberty National Life Ins. Co., 660 F.Supp. 1449, 1458 (N.D.Ala.1987) (Hancock, J.). In July 1989, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the injunction, but concluded its opinion by observing......
-
Ex parte Hicks
...Life Ins. Co., 493 F.2d 39 (5th Cir.1974), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1110, 95 S.Ct. 784, 42 L.Ed.2d 807 (1975); Battle v. Liberty Nat'l Life Ins. Co., 660 F.Supp. 1449 (N.D.Ala.1987), aff'd, 877 F.2d 877 (11th Cir.1989); and Taylor v. Liberty Nat'l Life Ins. Co., 462 So.2d 907 (Ala. Headland &......
-
Estate of Jackson v. Gen. Elec. Capital Corp. (In re Fundamental Long Term Care, Inc.)
...jurisdiction over complex, in personam lawsuits.The Eleventh Circuit first recognized this “complex litigation” scenario in Battle v. Liberty National Life Insurance .90 That case involved complicated and protracted class-action litigation between a funeral insurance provider and certain po......
- Village of Kiryas Joel v. Village of Woodbury