Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00846/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00846-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 110
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Interpleader Action

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PRIMERICA LIFE INSURANCE

COMPANY,

Plaintiff,

v.

LIDIA CARRASCO, LIDIA TREJO,

SORAYA TREJO, JOSHUA DE LA

GARZA, a minor, DAVID DE LA

GARZA, ROBERTO DE LA GARZA, JOSE

DE LA GARZA III, BLANCA ESTELE

DE LA GARZA, AND THE ESTATE OF

JOSE DE LA GARZA, JR.,

Defendants.

________________________________

AND RELATED CROSS-CLAIM.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:05-cv-00846 OWW LJO

ORDER AFTER SCHEDULING

CONFERENCE 

Further Scheduling

Conference: 12/16/05 8:45

Ctrm. 2

I. Date of Scheduling Conference.

October 26, 2005.

II. Appearances Of Counsel.

Pohls & Associates by Robert R. Pohls, Esq., appeared on

behalf of Plaintiff. 

Law Offices of Timothy J. Lemucchi by Craig A. Edmonston,

Esq., appeared on behalf of Defendants. 

///

Case 1:05-cv-00846-OWW -LJO Document 11 Filed 10/28/05 Page 1 of 5
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

III. Summary of Pleadings. 

1. Robert R. Pohls and Stacey L. Leask of Pohls &

Associates represent Primerica Life.

2. Timothy J. Lemucchi and Craig A. Edmonston of the Law

Offices of Timothy J. Lemucchi represent defendants Lydia

Carrasco, Lidia Trejo and Soraya Trejo.

3. Although the remaining defendants have, at different

times, communicated with Primerica Life and the attorneys for

defendants Lydia Carrasco, Lidia Trejo and Soraya Trejo through

two different attorneys, neither of those attorneys has formally

appeared in this action. In addition, none of the remaining

defendants has responded to Primerica Life’s requests that they

formally waive service of process. At this time, then,

defendants Joshua De La Garza (a minor), David De La Garza,

Roberto De La Garza, Jose De La Garza III, Blanca Estele De La

Garza and The Estate of Jose De La Garza, Jr., are unserved and

unrepresented in this action. 

4. This is an interpleader action which involves competing

claims to the proceeds of an insurance policy that Primerica Life

issued to insure the lives of Jose De La Garza, Jr., and certain

other individuals.

5. Jose De La Garza, Jr., died as the result of a homicide

on September 23, 2004. By reason of his death, the total

proceeds due and owing under the Policy was the sum of $700,000,

plus interest.

6. At all times, Primerica Life has been ready, willing

and able to pay the proceeds of Mr. De La Garza’s coverage under

the policy to the person(s) legally entitled thereto. However,

Case 1:05-cv-00846-OWW -LJO Document 11 Filed 10/28/05 Page 2 of 5
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3

by reason of actual and potential conflicting claims to those

proceeds, Primerica Life does not know and cannot determine the

person(s) legally entitled to those proceeds. In particular, the

following persons make (or may make) the following claims to the

proceeds of Mr. De La Garza’s coverage under the policy:

a. Lydia Carrasco: Ms. Carrasco claims that she is

entitled to the proceeds as the primary beneficiary identified in

the policy;

b. Lidia Trejo, Soraya Trejo, Joshua De La Garza,

David De La Garza, Roberto De La Garza and Jose De La Garza

III: These several defendants claim (or may claim) that they are

entitled to the proceeds because they are among the contingent

beneficiaries identified in the policy and California Probate

Code Section 252 requires that any proceeds which are payable by

reason of Mr. De La Garza’s death be distributed as if Lydia

Carrasco predeceased him;

c. Blanca De La Garza: Mrs. De La Garza claims that

she is entitled to the proceeds because she is Mr. De La Garza’s

surviving spouse and therefore has a community property interest

in the policy and proceeds which are payable by reason of Mr. De

La Garza’s death.

d. Estate of Jose De La Garza, Jr.: The estate

claims (or may claim) to be entitled to the proceeds because the

policy does not identify any contingent beneficiaries and

California Probate Section 252 requires that any proceeds which

are payable by reason of Mr. De La Garza’s death be distributed

as if Lydia Carrasco predeceased him.

7. Primerica Life deposited the proceeds of Mr. De La

Case 1:05-cv-00846-OWW -LJO Document 11 Filed 10/28/05 Page 3 of 5
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4

Garza’s coverage under the policy, plus interest, with the Clerk

of the Court when it filed the complaint herein. Having done so,

Primerica Life maintains that it is entitled to a judgment in

interpleader which discharges it of any further liability by

reason of Mr. De La Garza’s death and which, in accordance with

California Code of Civil Procedure Section 386.6, directs that

its attorneys’ fees and costs be repaid from the proceeds on

deposit with the Court.

IV. Orders Re Amendments To Pleadings.

1. The parties do not anticipate filing any amendments to

the pleadings at this time. 

V. Factual Summary.

A. Admitted Facts Which Are Deemed Proven Without Further

Proceedings. 

1. In this interpleader action Plaintiff has no

interest in the proceeds of Mr. De La Garza’s coverage under the

insurance policy and until it deposited those proceeds with the

Clerk of the Court, was a mere stakeholder of the proceeds.

2. Primerica Life does not contest any Defendant’s

claims to the proceeds of Mr. De La Garza’s coverage under the

policy.

3. Although Lydia Carrasco, Lidia Trejo and Soraya

Trejo do not contest Primerica Life’s right to a judgment in

interpleader, they reserve the right to contest related attorneys

fees and costs.

4. Defendants also contest claims that each other

Defendant makes to the proceeds of the policy.

///

Case 1:05-cv-00846-OWW -LJO Document 11 Filed 10/28/05 Page 4 of 5
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

5

B. Contested Facts.

1. All remaining facts are contested.

VI. Legal Issues.

A. Uncontested.

1. Jurisdiction exists under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 and 28

U.S.C. § 1355.

2. Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1392.

3. The parties agree that the substantive law of

the State of California provides the rule of decision in this

case. 

B. Contested. 

1. All remaining legal issues are contested.

VII. Status of Case.

1. Due to the lack of service of a number of the parties,

a further scheduling conference shall be held on December 16,

2005, at 8:45 a.m. The parties will endeavor to complete service

of all parties in this case by that time. 

DATED: October 26, 2005.

/s/ OLIVER W. WANGER

 

 Oliver W. Wanger

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

primerica v. carrasco sch con

Case 1:05-cv-00846-OWW -LJO Document 11 Filed 10/28/05 Page 5 of 5