General Phoenix Corporation v. Malyon
| Decision Date | 13 December 1949 |
| Citation | 88 F. Supp. 502 |
| Parties | GENERAL PHŒNIX CORPORATION v. MALYON. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
Glatzer, Glatzer & Diamond, New York City, for plaintiff.
Donald A. Gray, New York City, for defendants.
This is a motion to remand an action to the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County.
The General Phoenix Corporation is a Pennsylvania corporation authorized to do business in New York. In connection with its business of finance factoring, it obtained policies of insurance from Lloyds of London which, in general, indemnified it against losses arising out of its purchase or making of loans against fictitious accounts receivable and like transactions.
The plaintiff commenced suit on the policies in the State Court against the defendant, an alien residing in England, and the latter removed the suit to this Court on October 27, 1949. There is no doubt that this Court has jurisdiction and the suit was properly removed, unless a clause contained in each of the policies affects the privilege of removal. It reads as follows: "It is agreed that in the event of the failure of Underwriters hereon to pay any amount claimed to be due hereunder, Underwriters hereon, at the request of the Assured, will submit to the jurisdiction of any Court of competent jurisdiction within the United States and will comply with all requirements necessary to give such Court jurisdiction and all matters arising hereunder shall be determined in accordance with the law and practice of such Court.
The plaintiff insists that this clause is an effective waiver in advance of suit of the privileges of removal; while the defendant argues that it is merely an agreement to submit to personal jurisdiction and would be illegal if construed in accordance with the plaintiff's suggestion.
Unquestionably, the privilege of removal may be...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Colonial Bank & Trust Co. v. Cahill
...remove to a federal forum. Compare, Home Ins. Co. v. Morse, 20 Wall. 445, 87 U.S. 445, 22 L.Ed. 365 (1874), with General Phoenix Corp. v. Malyon, 88 F.Supp. 502 (S.D. N.Y. 1949). A voluntary waiver of the right to remove may be evidenced by the conduct of the defendant in expressly submitti......
-
McDermott Intern., Inc. v. Lloyds Underwriters of London
...1208, 1209 (E.D.La.1969); accord J. MOORE & B. RINGLE, 1A MOORE'S FEDERAL PRACTICE p 0.157 at 152; but see General Phoenix Corp. v. Malyon, 88 F.Supp. 502, 503 (S.D.N.Y.1949) (recognizing possibility that service-of-suit clause only waived objections to personal jurisdiction, but interpreti......
-
Foster v. Chesapeake Ins. Co., Ltd.
...London, 302 F.Supp. 384 (C.D.Cal.1969); Euzzino v. London & Edinburgh Ins. Co., 228 F.Supp. 431 (N.D.Ill.1964); General Phoenix Corp. v. Malyon, 88 F.Supp. 502 (S.D.N.Y.1949). We also note that the clause in this case provides that matters arising out of the reinsurance agreement are to "be......
-
Norfolk Southern Corporation v. California Union Insurance Company
...of law" clause. See Perini v. Orion Insurance Company, 331 F.Supp. 453 (E.D. Cal. 1971); General Phoenix Corporation v. Malyon, 88 F.Supp. 502 (S.D.N.Y. 1949). Despite the court's reference to those cases, however, neither of them even addressed, much less decided, the issue of whether or n......