Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-alnd-5_16-cv-00975/USCOURTS-alnd-5_16-cv-00975-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Auto Owners Insurance Company
Defendant
Daniel Kirkland
Plaintiff
United States of America
Defendant

Document Text:

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHEASTERN DIVISION

DANIEL KIRKLAND, 

 

Plaintiff, 

 

v. Case No.: 5:16-cv-00975-MHH

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA;

AUTO-OWNERS INSURANCE

COMPANY, 

 

Defendants. 

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Plaintiff Daniel Kirkland seeks damages for injuries he sustained in an 

automobile accident that involved an employee of the United States Marine Corps. 

(Doc. 1). To recover those damages, Mr. Kirkland has sued the United States of 

America under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b), 2401(b), 2671–

2680. Mr. Kirkland also seeks uninsured motorist benefits from his insurer, AutoOwners Insurance Company. (Doc. 1). The defendants have moved to dismiss

this action pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or, 

alternatively, for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56. (Doc. 10; Doc. 14). For 

the reasons stated below, the Court grants the United States’ motion to dismiss and

orders Mr. Kirkland to show cause why the Court should not dismiss his claim 

against Auto-Owners without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction.

}

}

}

}

}

}

}

}

}

}

}

FILED

 2016 Oct-31 AM 09:08

U.S. DISTRICT COURT

N.D. OF ALABAMA

Case 5:16-cv-00975-MHH Document 19 Filed 10/31/16 Page 1 of 6
2

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On June 19, 2014, Mr. Kirkland was driving his vehicle in Huntsville, 

Alabama when Joseph Morron’s vehicle collided with his. (Doc. 1, pp. 2–3). Mr. 

Kirkland lost control of his vehicle, and his vehicle left the roadway, overturned,

and ended up in an embankment. (Doc. 1-1, p. 2). Mr. Kirkland suffered injuries 

and was transported to Huntsville Hospital. (Doc. 1-1, p. 2). Since the accident, 

Mr. Kirkland has been treated by doctors for pain in his back, left knee, ankle, and 

foot. (Doc. 1-1, p. 2). 

When the accident occurred, Mr. Morron, a recruiter for the United States 

Marine Corps, was acting within the course of his employment; he was traveling to 

Guntersville, Alabama to enlist a young man in the Marines. (Doc. 15-1, p. 52). 

Mr. Morron testified that he lost consciousness at the wheel and recalls nothing

about the accident, but he alleges that “there was a guy standing outside of [his] 

car” after the accident who told him that another vehicle had “‘cut [him] off,’” 

causing his vehicle to cross into oncoming traffic and strike Mr. Kirkland’s

vehicle. (Doc. 15-1, pp. 53–55, 58). The identity and whereabouts of the witness 

and motorist who allegedly caused the accident are unknown. (Doc. 15, p. 2; Doc. 

17, pp. 2–5).

On December 3, 2014, Mr. Kirkland filed an administrative tort claim with 

the United States Department of Navy, Office of the Judge Advocate General, for 

Case 5:16-cv-00975-MHH Document 19 Filed 10/31/16 Page 2 of 6
3

injuries and damages that he suffered in the accident with Mr. Morron. (Doc. 1-1, 

p. 2). The Navy denied Mr. Kirkland’s claim on October 1, 2015, finding no 

evidence that Mr. Morron was negligent. (Doc. 10, p. 19). The denial letter 

advised Mr. Kirkland that he had “six months from the date of mailing of this letter 

to file suit in the appropriate Federal district court.” (Doc. 10, p. 19). 

On June 15, 2016, more than eight months after the U.S. Navy denied his 

administrative claim, Mr. Kirkland filed this suit. (Doc. 1). As stated, Mr. 

Kirkland asserts a claim against the United States under the Federal Tort Claims 

Act, and he asserts a state law claim for uninsured motorist benefits against AutoOwners. (Doc. 1, pp. 4–5). 

II. ANALYSIS 

A. Federal Tort Claims Act

Mr. Kirkland concedes that his FTCA claim is barred by the FTCA’s statute 

of limitations. (Doc. 10, pp. 7–10; Doc. 15, p. 3; Doc. 18). Under 28 U.S.C. § 

2401(b), “[a] tort claim against the United States shall be forever barred” if a 

claimant fails to file his federal court claim within “six months after the date of 

mailing, by certified or registered mail, of notice of final denial of the

[administrative] claim.” 28 U.S.C. § 2401(b). The Navy denied Mr. Kirkland’s 

administrative tort claim on October 1, 2015, and more than eight months later, on 

June 15, 2016, Mr. Kirkland filed this suit. (Doc. 1; Doc. 10, p. 2). Because Mr. 

Case 5:16-cv-00975-MHH Document 19 Filed 10/31/16 Page 3 of 6
4

Kirkland failed to file his FTCA claim against the United States in federal district 

court within six months of the Navy’s denial of his administrative claim, the FTCA

claim is time-barred.

B. Uninsured Motorist Insurance Coverage 

Mr. Kirkland argues that he is entitled to recover damages from AutoOwners under the uninsured/underinsured motorist provision in his automobile 

policy. (Doc. 1, pp. 4–5; Doc. 15, pp. 2–4). This is a state law claim. With the 

resolution of Mr. Kirkland’s federal claim, the Court has the option of refusing to 

exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state claim if the Court does not have 

an independent basis for subject matter jurisdiction over the state claim. The Court 

may exercise jurisdiction over the state law claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 if 

there is complete diversity of citizenship between Mr. Kirkland and Auto-Owners, 

and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.00, exclusive of interest and costs. 

28 U.S.C. § 1332(a); Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London v. Osting-Schwinn, 613 

F.3d 1079, 1085 (11th Cir. 2012). Mr. Kirkland’s jurisdictional allegations are not 

sufficient for the Court to determine whether it may exercise diversity jurisdiction 

because Mr. Kirkland has not properly alleged his citizenship or the citizenship of 

Auto-Owners in his complaint.

In his complaint, Mr. Kirkland states that he “is and was a resident of the 

State of Tennessee.” (Doc. 1, ¶ 1). Alleging “[r]esidence alone is not enough” to 

Case 5:16-cv-00975-MHH Document 19 Filed 10/31/16 Page 4 of 6
5

establish citizenship for purposes of diversity jurisdiction. Travaglio v. Am. Exp. 

Co., 735 F.3d 1266, 1269 (11th Cir. 2013). “Citizenship, not residence, is the key 

fact that must be alleged [] to establish diversity for a natural person.” Taylor v. 

Appleton, 30 F.3d 1365, 1367 (11th Cir. 1994). The citizenship of a natural person 

is determined by the person’s domicile, and domicile consists of two elements: 

state of residence and intent to remain in the state of residence. Travaglio, 735 

F.3d at 1269. Because Mr. Kirkland has alleged only his place of residence and 

not his place of domicile, the complaint does not contain sufficient information to 

allow the Court to determine his citizenship under 28 U.S.C. § 1332.

In addition, in his complaint, Mr. Kirkland asserts that Auto-Owners “is a 

Michigan corporation.” (Doc. 1, ¶ 4). A corporation is a citizen of both the state 

of incorporation and the state in which the corporation has its principal place of 

business. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1); see also Hertz Corp. v. Friend, 559 U.S. 77, 

92–93 (2010). In his complaint, Mr. Kirkland does not allege Auto-Owners’

principal place of business. 

To allow the Court to assess diversity jurisdiction, on or before November 

7, 2016, Mr. Kirkland shall file a declaration or an affidavit that sufficiently 

indicates his citizenship and the citizenship of Auto-Owners.

1

 

1 With respect to the amount in controversy, Mr. Kirkland alleges: “Plaintiff demands judgment 

against Defendant, Auto Owners Insurance Company, in excess of the minimum jurisdictional 

Case 5:16-cv-00975-MHH Document 19 Filed 10/31/16 Page 5 of 6
6

III. CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS the United States’ motion to 

dismiss Mr. Kirkland’s FTCA claim. The Court DISMISSES the FTCA claim 

WITH PREJUDICE. The Court postpones a ruling on Auto-Owners’ motion to 

dismiss until the Court determines whether it has an independent basis for 

exercising jurisdiction over Mr. Kirkland’s state law claim against the insurer. 

DONE and ORDERED this October 31, 2016.

 _________________________________

 MADELINE HUGHES HAIKALA

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

limits set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1332, in an amount to be determined by the trier of fact plus 

costs.” (Doc. 1, p. 5).

Case 5:16-cv-00975-MHH Document 19 Filed 10/31/16 Page 6 of 6