Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Company v. Gillis

• Court: District Court, W.D. Washington
• Decided: April 7, 2025
• Docket: 2:25-cv-00350
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3

4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 COLONIAL LIFE AND ACCIDENT CASE NO. C25-0350-KKE 8 INSURANCE COMPANY, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR 9 Plaintiff, INTERPLEADER WITHOUT PREJUDICE v. 10

DELORIS JEAN GILLIS, et al., 11

Defendant. 12

13 Plaintiff Colonial Life and Accident Insurance Company (“Colonial”) brings this case to 14 interplead the disputed death benefits of Joe Ingram Gillis (“Decedent”) under 28 U.S.C. § 1355 15 and Local Civil Rule 67(d). Dkt. No. 6. 16 For the Court to have subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1335, the amount in 17 dispute must exceed $500 and there must be “[t]wo or more adverse claimants, of diverse 18 citizenship[.]” 28 U.S.C. §1335(a)(1). Colonial alleges such minimally diverse claimants. Dkt. 19 No. 1 ¶¶ 3–9 (Decedent’s wife, one child, and two grandchildren are citizens of Washington and 20 a second child, and two other grandchildren are citizens of Texas). But for purposes of establishing 21 diversity jurisdiction, the Court can only consider the citizenship of served parties. Cripps v. Life 22 Ins. Co. of N. Am., 980 F.2d 1261, 1266 (9th Cir. 1992) (“[A] party cannot create diversity by 23 naming as a defendant a party who is not in fact brought into the lawsuit by service of process.”). 24 1 The record only reflects service of the complaint and motion on Washington-based 2 claimants. See Dkt. Nos. 5, 9–11. 3 Accordingly, the motion for interpleader is DENIED. Dkt. No. 6.

4 Colonial must provide proof of service under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) for at 5 least one diverse claimant by May 26, 2025 or the case will be dismissed for lack of subject matter 6 jurisdiction. 7 8 Dated this 7th day of April, 2025. 9 A 10 Kymberly K. Evanson 11 United States District Judge

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24