Bishop v. Allstate Insurance Company, ED 70-C-7.
| Decision Date | 22 June 1970 |
| Docket Number | No. ED 70-C-7.,ED 70-C-7. |
| Citation | 313 F. Supp. 875 |
| Parties | Barbara Nell BISHOP and Billy E. Bishop, Plaintiffs, v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Arkansas |
Robert C. Compton (Brown, Compton, Prewett & Dickens), El Dorado, Ark., for plaintiffs.
John M. Shackleford, Shackleford & Shackleford, El Dorado, Ark., for defendant.
This case is a removal cause from the Union County Circuit Court, Second Division, El Dorado, Arkansas. The plaintiffs are citizens and residents of the City of El Dorado, Arkansas, and the defendant, Allstate Insurance Compay, is a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Illinois, with the principal place of business at Northbrook, Illinois. The amount in dispute exceeds the sum of $10,000, exclusive of interest and costs.
The plaintiffs have filed a motion to remand the cause of action to the Circuit Court of Union County, Arkansas, Second Division. The plaintiffs contend lack of diversity of citizenship as required by 28 U.S.C.A. § 1332(c).1 The only issue is whether Allstate is deemed to be a citizen of Arkansas within the purview of the 1964 amendment to § 1332 as pertinent to this proceeding. The plaintiffs argue that since the complaint is a "direct action" against the defendant, Allstate Insurance Company, the amended statute is applicable. Allstate contends that the statute referred only to case brought by a claimant in a tort action under a "direct action" statute against the insurer of the alleged tortfeasor.
The complaint alleges that the defendant issued its liability insurance policy to the plaintiff, Billy E. Bishop, for valid consideration on a 1966 Mercury automobile. While the policy was in force and effect, on or about July 16, 1969, a collision occurred which caused injury to the plaintiff, Barbara Nell Bishop. The collision occurred with a 1966 Mustang driven by one Merlon J. Roberts, a citizen and resident of Minden, Louisiana, who was an uninsured motorist within the meaning of the policy of insurance.
Under Arkansas law liability insurance coverage is required against uninsured motor vehicles unless rejected by the insured. Ark.Stat. 66-4003. There is no "direct action" statute of Arkansas such as provided by the respective legislatures in Louisiana and Wisconsin.
The United States District Court has jurisdiction in an uninsured motorist claim against the insurer if diversity is present and the amount involved exceeds $10,000. Wortman v. Safeco Insurance Company of America, D.C., 227 F.Supp. 468, Cf. Rogers v. United Service, 6...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rosa v. Allstate Ins. Co.
...motorist coverage); Adams v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 313 F.Supp. 1349, 1352 (N.D.Miss.1970) (same); Bishop v. Allstate Ins. Co., 313 F.Supp. 875, 876 (W.D.Ark.1970) (same); see generally 13B Charles A. Wright et al., Federal Practice and Procedure § 3629, at 674-75 (1984).12 See Tuc......
-
Bowers v. Continental Ins. Co.
...not control. See, e.g. Adams v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 313 F.Supp. 1349 (N.D.Miss.1970); Bishop v. Allstate Insurance Co., 313 F.Supp. 875 (W.D.Ark.1970). Accordingly, the district court did not err in denying Bowers' motion to Bowers next claims that he is entitled to ......
-
Hernandez v. Travelers Insurance Company
...Co., D.C.Mont.1966, 260 F.Supp. 95. 3 Adams v. State Farm Mutual Auto Ins. Co., N.D.Miss.1970, 313 F.Supp. 1349; Bishop v. Allstate Ins. Co., W.D.Ark.1970, 313 F. Supp. 875; Inman v. MFA Mutual Ins. Co., E.D.Ark.1967, 264 F.Supp. 4 Carvin v. Standard Accident Ins. Co., D.C. Tenn.1966, 253 F......
-
Roby v. General Tire & Rubber Co.
...Co., 356 F.2d 746 (1st Cir. 1966); Adams v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co., 313 F.Supp. 1349 (N.D.Miss. 1970); Bishop v. Allstate Ins. Co., 313 F.Supp. 875 (W.D.Ark.1970); Inman v. MFA Mutual Ins. Co., 264 F.Supp. 727 4 A copy of that said opinion is attached hereto. 1 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(a) a......