In Re Unitrin, Inc., Insurance Sales Practices Litigation
This text of 217 F. Supp. 2d 1371 (In Re Unitrin, Inc., Insurance Sales Practices Litigation) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
ORDER DENYING TRANSFER
This litigation consists of thirteen actions listed on the attached Schedule A: ten actions pending in the Southern District of Mississippi and three actions in the Northern District of Mississippi. The Un-itrin defendants 1 move the Panel, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, for an order centralizing this litigation in the Southern District of Mississippi. All plaintiffs oppose the motion.
On the basis of the papers filed and hearing session held, the Panel declines to order Section 1407 centralization. Mov-ants have failed to persuade us that transfer under Section 1407 is justified in this docket in which all actions are pending in *1372 adjacent federal districts within one state. We point out that alternatives to Section 1407 transfer exist, including cooperative management of these actions by the involved judges, that can minimize whatever possibilities there might be of duplicative discovery, inconsistent pretrial rulings, or both. See, e.g., In re Chromated Copper Arsenate (CCA) Treated Wood Products Liability Litigation, 188 F.Supp.2d 1380 (Jud.Pan.Mult.Lit.2002); see also Manual for Complex Litigation, Third, § 31.14 (1995).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the motion, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, for centralization of these actions is denied.
SCHEDULE A
MDL-1474-In re Unitrin, Inc., Insurance Sales Practices Litigation
Northern District of Mississippi
Monika Tucker, et al. v. Union National Life Insurance Co., et al., C.A. No. 4:01-240
Shirley Walker, et al., v. Union National Life Insurance Co., et al., C.A. No. 4:01-247
Minnie Wells v. United Insurance Co. of America, et al., C.A. No. 4:01-253
Southern District of Mississippi
Jacqueline Crosby, et al., v. Union National Life Insurance Co., et al., C.A. No. 2:01-343
Earnestine Chambers, et al., v. Union National Life Insurance Co., et al., C.A. No. 3:01-452
Tasha Garner v. Union National Life Insurance Co., et al., C.A. No. 3:01-844 Sarah Neely, et al. v. Union National Life Insurance Co., et al., C.A. No. 3:01-918
Annie Mae Porter, et al. v. Union National Life Insurance Co., et al., C.A. No. 4:00-206
Doss Abney, et al. v. Union National Life Insurance Co., et al., C.A. No. 4:01-170
Mary Geneva Harris v. Union National Life Insurance Co., et al., C.A. No. 4:02-1
Laura Jackson, et al. v. Union National Life Insurance Co., et al., C.A. No. 5:01-119
Dorothy Wells, et al. v. Union National Life Insurance Co., et al., C.A. No. 5:02-50
Marjorie Smith, et al. v. Union National Life Insurance Co., et al., C.A. No. 5:02-67
. Unitrin, Inc., United Insurance Company of America, Union National Life Insurance Company and Union National Fire Insurance Company.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
217 F. Supp. 2d 1371, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15127, 2002 WL 1905925, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-unitrin-inc-insurance-sales-practices-litigation-jpml-2002.