Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-01506/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-01506-0/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

 

* This matter was determined to be suitable for decision

without oral argument. L.R. 78-230(h).

 

1 This failure violated Local Rule 78-230(c) which prescribes:

“A responding party who has no opposition to the granting of the

motion shall serve and file a statement to that effect, specifically

designating the motion in question.”

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SIERRA HEALTH & LIFE ) CIV. S-04-1506 GEB PAN

INSURANCE COMPANY, INC., )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

MARIE JOHNSTON; JAMES ) ORDER*

ANTHONY HOLLINS; and )

DOES 1-25, inclusive, )

)

Defendants. )

)

Plaintiff Sierra Health and Life Insurance Co. (“Sierra”)

filed a complaint in interpleader and for declaratory relief. Sierra

now moves for an order requiring interpleader; for dismissal from this

action and discharge from further liability regarding its rights and

obligations on behalf of its insured, Jarita Hollins; and for an award

of attorney’s fees and costs. Defendant James Anthony Hollins did not

file an opposition to Sierra’s motion,1 and Defendant Marie Johnston

only opposed the portion of Sierra’s motion that seeks attorney’s

Case 2:04-cv-01506-GEB-PAN Document 48 Filed 06/17/05 Page 1 of 3
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

fees. 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 22 authorizes an

interpleader plaintiff to join defendants and require them to

interplead their claims to the interpleaded fund “when their claims

are such that the plaintiff is or may be exposed to double or multiple

liability.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 22(a). Since no party opposes this

aspect of Sierra’s motion, it will be granted. 

Defendant Hollins moves for summary judgment, in which he

seeks an order disbursing to him the $12,000 which is the remaining

proceeds from Jarita Hollins’s life insurance policy. Sierra filed a

non-opposition to Defendant Hollins’s motion, and Defendant Marie

Johnston failed to respond to Defendant Hollins’s motion. 

At the time of Jarita Hollins’s death in 1999, she had a

life insurance policy with Sierra that provided $24,000 in coverage

payable after her death. (Def. Hollins’s Separate Statement of

Undisputed Facts (“SUF”) at ¶ 3.) Since Ms. Hollins died without a

named beneficiary, or a spouse or child, the policy provides that the

proceeds are to be divided equally among any surviving parents. (SUF

¶¶ 4-6.) Defendant Hollins declares that he is the father of Jarita

Hollins (SUF ¶ 7), and that since Sierra has already paid Defendant

Johnston $12,000 from the proceeds of the policy, he is entitled to be

paid the remaining $12,000. (SUF ¶¶ 7,9.) 

Since there is no genuine issue of material fact regarding

Defendant Hollins’s entitlement to the remaining proceeds, his motion

for summary judgment is granted. Sierra is ordered to pay Defendant

Hollins the remaining amount of the policy ($12,000), minus its

attorney’s fees. Because Sierra and Defendant Hollins filed a

stipulation in which they agreed that $1,500 is to be paid to Sierra

Case 2:04-cv-01506-GEB-PAN Document 48 Filed 06/17/05 Page 2 of 3
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

for its attorney’s fees, this amount shall be deducted from the

remaining policy proceeds amount of $12,000. Therefore, Sierra is

ordered to pay $10,500 to Defendant Hollins. 

Since Defendant Johnston received her share of the policy

proceeds prior to the commencement of this action and is not entitled

to any portion of the funds at issue, Sierra’s motion for attorney’s

fees from Defendant Johnston is denied. 

Sierra is dismissed from the action and is discharged from

all further liability regarding the rights and obligations under

Jarita Hollins’s life insurance policy. Summary judgment is entered

in favor of Defendant Hollins. The Clerk of the Court is ordered to

close this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 16, 2005

/s/ Garland E. Burrell, Jr.

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-01506-GEB-PAN Document 48 Filed 06/17/05 Page 3 of 3