To determine whether diversity of citizenship exists when a plaintiff sues an insurance company in federal court, one must consider the effect of 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1), as a plaintiff learned in a recent case filed in the Eastern District of Michigan.
Trial Strategy: Understanding the Direct Action Provision of Section 1332(C)(1) in Federal Lawsuits Against Insurers
1. The following article is from National Underwriter’s latest online resource,
FC&S Legal: The Insurance Coverage Law Information Center.
The Insurance Coverage Law Information Center
TRIAL STRATEGY: UNDERSTANDING THE DIRECT ACTION PROVISION
OF SECTION 1332(C)(1) IN FEDERAL LAWSUITS AGAINST INSURERS
December 10, 2013 Steven A. Meyerowitz, Esq., Director, FC&S Legal
To determine whether diversity of citizenship exists when a plaintiff sues an insurance company in federal court, one must
consider the effect of 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1), as a plaintiff learned in a recent case filed in the Eastern District of Michigan.
The Case
Elvira Lulgjuraj, a resident of Sterling Heights, Michigan, was driving an automobile owned by Bardhyl Mulalli when she
was involved in an accident. Ms. Lulgjuraj claimed that she sustained serious injuries as a result of the accident and she
brought suit in the Eastern District of Michigan against the vehicle owner’s insurer, State Farm Automobile Insurance
Company. Ms. Lulgjuraj did not name the vehicle owner as a party-defendant.
Ms. Lulgjuraj alleged diversity of citizenship as the basis for the court’s jurisdiction, predicated on her Michigan citizenship and the Illinois citizenship of State Farm; the Lulgjuraj complaint contained no allegations as to the citizenship of the
owner of the vehicle insured by State Farm.
State Farm moved for summary judgment.
28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1)
28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1) provides:
For purposes of this section and section 1441 of this title [which governs removal of actions]
(1) a corporation shall be deemed to be a citizen of any State by which it has been incorporated and of the State where
it has its principal place of business, except that in any direct action against the insurer of a policy or contract of liability
insurance, whether incorporated or unincorporated, to which action the insured is not joined as a party-defendant, such
insurer shall be deemed a citizen of the State of which the insured is a citizen, as well as of any State by which the insurer
has been incorporated and of the State where it has its principal place of business.
(Emphasis supplied.)
The Court’s Decision
The court granted the insurer’s motion.
In its decision, it explained that the direct action provision in 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1) was applicable in suits against
insurers under Michigan’s no-fault scheme, and where imputing the insured’s citizenship to the insurer destroyed diversity,
a federal court was without jurisdiction to hear the case.
The court then found that, pursuant to Section 1332(c)(1), it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the action brought by
Ms. Lulgjuraj. It explained that she was a citizen of Michigan and that State Farm, a citizen of Illinois, also was a citizen of
Michigan because Bardhyl Mulalli, the insured, apparently was a citizen of Michigan (and it was the burden of Ms. Lulgjuraj
to demonstrate otherwise, which she did not do).
The court concluded by observing that the direct action provision of Section 1332(c)(1) was not applicable where an
insured sued his or her own insurance carrier, but that in this case Ms. Lulgjuraj did not seek to recover benefits from her
own insurance company but rather from the insurer of a third party, Bardhyl Mulalli.
Call 1-800-543-0874 | Email customerservice@SummitProNets.com | www.fcandslegal.com