Buckeye State Mut. Ins. Co. v. Moens
| Citation | 944 F.Supp.2d 678 |
| Decision Date | 13 May 2013 |
| Docket Number | No. C 12–4025–MWB.,C 12–4025–MWB. |
| Parties | BUCKEYE STATE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. Brent MOENS, Tanya Dee Moens, Estate of Gerald Ralph Boge a/k/a Jerald Ralph Boge, Douglas Lee Oldenkamp, Tracey Bailey, individually and as Guardian of BJB, Daniel Bailey, Lee Rae Geisinger, individually, Conservatorship of Lee Rae Geisinger, Alice Marie Geisinger, individually, Conservatorship of Alice Condit a/k/a Alice Marie Geisinger, Wellmark, Inc., United Fire Group, Inc., Valley Forge Insurance Company, and American Zurich Insurance Co., Defendants. Daniel Bailey, Tracey Bailey, and Braeden J. Bailey, Cross–Claimants, v. Brent Moens, Tanya Dee Moens, and Cole Moens, Cross–Claim Defendants. Lee Rae Geisinger, individually, Conservatorship of Lee Rae Geisinger, Alice Marie Geisinger, individually, Conservatorship of Alice Condit a/k/a Alice Marie Geisinger, Third–Party Plaintiffs, v. C.M. and GCC Alliance Concrete, Inc., Third–Party Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Iowa |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Stanley J. Thompson, Davis Brown Koehn Shors & Roberts, Des Moines, IA, for Plaintiff.
John H. Moorlach, Matthew D. Giles, Whitfield & Eddy, PLC, Michael A. Carmoney, Carmoney Law Firm, PLLC, Des Moines, IA, James R. Lawyer, Lawyer Lawyer Dutton Drake, West Des Moines, IA, John C. Gray, Heidman Law Firm, LLP, Bryan J. Arneson, Bikakis, Mayne, Arneson, Hindman & Hisey, Angie J. Schneiderman, Berenstein, Moore, Berenstein, Heffernan & Moeller, LLP, Sioux City, IA, Neal R. Scharmer, Registered Agent, Cedar Rapids, IA, Robert E. Wilens, Clausen Miller, PC, Christy Harrison Schaefer, Nielsen, Zehe & Antas, PC, Chicago, IL, for Defendants.
John C. Gray, Heidman Law Firm, LLP, Sioux City, IA, for Cross–Claimants.
John H. Moorlach, Matthew D. Giles, Whitfield & Eddy, PLC, Des Moines, IA, for Cross–Claim Defendants.
Shannon R. Falon, Steven M. Johnson, Johnson Heidepriem & Abdallah, LLP, Sioux Falls, SD, Steven Kenneth Huff, Johnson, Miner, Marlow, Woodward & Huff, LLC, Yankton, SD, for Third–Party Plaintiffs.
John H. Moorlach, Matthew D. Giles, Whitfield & Eddy, PLC, Bradley C. Obermeier, Duncan Green Brown & Langeness, Des Moines, IA, for Third–Party Defendants.
This interpleader action, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1335, 1397, and 2361, was initiated by an insurance company, because it asserts that claims for “bodily injury” coverage, arising from a multi-vehicle accident, exceed policy limits. The insurance company has named as defendants its insureds and all claimants to “bodily injury” coverage, deposited funds up to the policy limits with the court, and asks to be exonerated from any further liability to its insureds or the claimants, leaving this court to determine the proper allocation of the funds among the claimants. One state court action arising from the underlying accident was stayed by agreement of the parties, pending disposition of this federal action, and all of the claims concerning liability and fault originally asserted in that state court action are now asserted in this federal action, via cross-claims and third-party claims. The plaintiff's insureds now seek an order enjoining another state court action arising from the accident, after the state court denied a contested motion for a stay in that case. Most of the parties to this federal action have joined in the insureds' motion to stay the remaining state court action, but the plaintiff in that action, who is already a party to this federal interpleader action, resists such a stay. The insureds assert that an injunction on the remaining state court action is authorized by § 2361 and otherwise appropriate, while the plaintiff in that action asserts that such an injunction would exceed the authority for an injunction under § 2361, as interpreted by the United States Supreme Court in State Farm Fire & Casualty Company v. Tashire, 386 U.S. 523, 87 S.Ct. 1199, 18 L.Ed.2d 270 (1967).
This interpleader action and two state court actions arise from a multi-vehicle accident on August 11, 2010, at the intersection of U.S. Highway 71 and County Road C25, in Buena Vista County, Iowa. The initial collision occurred as a vehicle driven by teenager Cole Moens, in which BJB was a passenger, entered the highway and collided with a semi-trailer truck driven by Douglas Lee Oldenkamp, and owned by GCC Alliance Concrete, Inc., which was traveling on the highway. Cole's vehicle then spun into a vehicle driven by Lee Rae Geisinger, in which Alice Marie Geisinger was a passenger, and Oldenkamp's truck collided with another semi-trailer truck driven by Gerald Boge, and owned by Hog Slat, Inc. Although there are allegations of tortious conduct by others involved in the accident, only Cole received any citations arising from the accident—specifically, a citation for failure to yield upon entering through a highway, and a citation for violation of a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kirk Excavating & Constr., Inc. v. Oilfield, Civil Action 2:14-cv-2097
...the fund itself, the res, is not the target of the litigation. Tashire, 386 U.S. at 535-36. See also Buckeye State Mut. Ins. Co. v. Moens, 944 F. Supp.2d 678, 700 (N.D. Io. 2013) ("The decision in Tashire effectively construes actions 'affecting' the property at issue in the interpleader as......
-
Am. Gen. Life Ins. Co. v. Vision
...there only be diversity between two or more of the adverse claimants is known as "minimal diversity." Buckeye State Mut. Ins. Co. v. Moens, 944 F. Supp. 2d 678, 688 (N.D. Iowa 2013); see also Noatex Corp. v. King Constr. of Hous., LLC, 864 F. Supp. 2d 478, 482 (N.D. Miss. 2012) ("The interp......
-
Hartford Cas. Ins. Co. v. Lexington Ins. Co.
...1335 simply "does not authorize consolidation of all related tort actions into a single action . . . ." Buckeye State Mut. Ins. Co. v. Moens, 944 F. Supp. 2d 678, 696 (N.D. Iowa 2013) (citing Tashire, 386 U.S. at 530, 535-37). Indeed, crossclaims are permissible "to attack [other interplead......
-
Esco Emp. Sav. Inv. Plan v. Walsh
...of multiparty litigation." State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Tashire, 386 U.S. 523, 535 (1967); see also Buckeye State Mut. Ins. Co. v. Moens, 944 F. Supp. 2d 678, 696 (N.D. Iowa 2013) (explaining that interpleader "does not authorize consolidation of all related tort actions into a single acti......