Seguros Tepeyac, SA, Compania Mexicana de Seguros Generales v. Bostrom, 21167.
| Decision Date | 09 May 1966 |
| Docket Number | No. 21167.,21167. |
| Citation | 360 F.2d 154 |
| Parties | SEGUROS TEPEYAC, S.A., COMPANIA MEXICANA de SEGUROS GENERALES, Appellant, v. Maynard BOSTROM and James L. Jernigan, Appellees. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
William M. Brown, Fort Worth, Tex., Chilton Bryan, Houston, Tex., Keith F. Kelly, Fort Worth, Tex., Jerome Sneed, Jr., Austin, Tex., for appellant.
Albert H. Manus, Jr., Freeport, Ill., Joe Spurlock, Fort Worth, Tex., Stanley S. Crooks, Dallas, Tex., John Alan Appleman, Urbana, Ill., for appellees.
Before BROWN and WISDOM, Circuit Judges, and ESTES, District Judge.
In the district court the plaintiff, Bostrom, recovered a judgment against the insurer, Seguros Tepeyac, S.A. in the amount of $270,000. This Court affirmed the judgment as to $5,000, the face amount of the policy of insurance Seguros Tepeyac issued to Jernigan, the intervenor. We reversed the judgment as to the excess amount over the policy limit of $5,000, without prejudice to the rights, if any, of the insured and the injured claimant, or either, to proceed against the insurer on claims and on a showing not inconsistent with this opinion. 347 F.2d 168.
The intervenor, joined by the plaintiff-appellee, filed a petition for a rehearing, contending that the Court should modify its opinion by issuing a declaratory judgment determining the rights of the parties as payments are made upon the excess judgment by the insured. The defendant-appellant argues that the intervention should now be dismissed; that the request for a declaratory judgment should be denied.
In the exercise of judicial discretion, the Court permitted Jernigan to intervene at the appellate level. We considered the intervenor's legal contentions to the extent they bore on the controversy between the parties. In order to participate in the proceedings on remand, it will be necessary for Jernigan to obtain the permission of the district court.
The granting of declaratory relief is not limited to trial courts. 28 U.S.C. § 2201; Mechling Barge Lines v. United States, 1961, 368 U.S. 324, 82 S.Ct. 337, 7 L.Ed.2d 317. However, in view of Jernigan's non-intervention at the trial level and the iffy-ness of his contentions at this level, the Court considers it undesirable to grant declaratory relief.
The Jernigan-Bostrom petition for rehearing is denied.
The insurer, in its petition for rehearing, contends that the suit should be dismissed for lack of the required jurisdictional amount. "It...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nicholas v. Tucker
...28 U.S.C. § 2201 to declare whether the filing fee provisions are constitutional. See Seguros Tepeyac, S.A., Compania Mexicana de Seguros Generales v. Bostrom, 360 F.2d 154, 155 (5th Cir.1966)(per curiam). For the reasons that follow, we declare and adjudge that the filing fee provisions at......
-
Johns-Manville Sales Corp. v. Mitchell Enterprises, Inc., 27967 Summary Calendar.
...by the amount ultimately recovered. E. g., Jones v. Landry, 5 Cir., 1967, 387 F.2d 102, 103; Seguros Tepeyac, S. A., Compania Mexicana de Seguros Generales v. Bostrom, 5 Cir., 1966, 360 F.2d 154. Whether the claim is made in good faith is "measured by the standard of legal certainty that th......
-
First Nat. Bank in Dallas v. Lampman
...Compania Mexicana de Seguros Generales v. Maynard Bostrom and James L. Jerigan, 347 F.2d 168, 177 (Fifth Circuit 1965), rehearing denied 360 F.2d 154. For the reasons stated the court erred in granting appellee's motion for summary judgment and erred in denying the Bank's motion for partial......
-
Martin v. Travelers Indemnity Company
...to our decision in Seguros Tepeyac, S.A., Compania Mexicana de Seguros Generales v. Bostrom, 5 Cir. 1965, 347 F.2d 168, rehearing denied 360 F.2d 154, and to a recent decision by the district court for the Northern District of Mississippi, Nichols v. U. S. F. & G. Co. (N.D.Miss. 1970), 318 ......