NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY v. MAAR et al
| NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY |
| MEGAN E. MAAR, EMILY MAAR ST. CHARLES, SARAH MAAR, Deborah Hudson Maar and MEGAN MAAR |
| 1:2020cv02449 |
| September 22, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Jane Magnus-Stinson |
| Doris L Pryor |
| Doris L Pryor |
| Insurance |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1335 Interpleader Action |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 2, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 30
CLOSED JUDGMENT - For the reasons set forth in the Court's August 10, 2021 Order, the Court now enters FINAL JUDGMENT in favor of Interpleader Defendant Deborah Hudson Maar in the amount of $3,221,606.62, together with any interest that accrued while those funds were in the Clerk's custody. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 2/2/2022. (MAC)
|
|
Filing 29
ORDER APPROVING STATUS REPORT AND APPROVING RELEASE OF FUNDS: Deborah H. Maar, in her capacity as the Personal Representative of the estate of the late Dean C. Maar, Deborah Maar, individually, and Sarah Maar, Megan Maar, and Emily St. Charles individually, filed their Status Report as required by the Court's Order of July 13, 2021, dkt #26 . Magistrate Judge Pryor recommended the District Judge approved the disbursement of the funds accordingly #28 . Therefore, the Court, having reviewed the combined Status Report and Motion for Release of Funds #27 and Magistrate Judge Pryor's entry, dk #28 , hereby APPROVES the Status Report and directs Deborah C. Maar to provide a completed Form W-9 to the email address finance@insd.uscourts.gov. The Court further orders and directs the Clerk of the Court or its designee, as soon as practicable after receipt of the completed Form W-9, to release to Deborah H. Maar, the sum of $3,221,606.62 New York Life deposited in connection with this case plus any and all additional accrued interest. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 8/10/2021. (MRI)
|
| Filing 28 ENTRY - The parties were instructed to file a status report in this matter within 14 days of the probate court's determination of the proposed settlement agreement. (Dkt. #26 ). On August 5, 2021, the parties filed a status report indicating that the probate court approved the Settlement Agreement and requesting that this Court disburse the applicable funds in accordance with that Settlement Agreement. (Dkt. #27 ). The Undersigned now recommends that the District Judge approve the parties' request and disburse the funds accordingly. Signed by Magistrate Judge Doris L. Pryor on 8/6/2021.(SWM) |
| Filing 27 STATUS REPORT by All Defendants. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Motion for Approval, #2 Exhibit Order Granting for Approval, #3 Text of Proposed Order)(Cowgur, Anne) Modified on 8/6/2021 (MRI). |
|
Filing 26
MINUTE ORDER for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Doris L. Pryor: The parties, by counsel, appeared for an initial pretrial conference on July 13, 2021, with the magistrate judge. The Court adopts the following schedule: (1) The Defendants will present their proposed settlement agreement to the probate court by July 27, 2021; and (2) the parties will file a status report with this Court within 14 days of the probate court's determination. Signed by Magistrate Judge Doris L. Pryor. (CAG)
|
|
Filing 24
SCHEDULING ORDER:This matter is set for a telephone status conference on July 13, 2021 at 3:00 p.m. (Eastern). The purpose of the conference is to discuss case status. Counsel shall attend the conference by calling the designated phone number, to be provided by the Court via email generated by the Court's ECF system.Signed by Magistrate Judge Doris L. Pryor on 7/9/2021.(CAG)
|
| Filing 23 MARGINAL ENTRY - The Court accepts the Joint JurisdictionalStatement, Dkt. #22 , as sufficient to establish theCourt's diversity jurisdiction at this time. The Court cautions all parties that statements in future filingsthat contradict the parties' representations hereinwill prompt the Court to require further action bythe parties. Accordingly, such statements should not be made without thorough investigation. JMS, CJ, 12/28/20 Electronically sent via CM/ECF. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 12/28/2020.(MRI) |
| Filing 22 Jurisdictional Statement filed Jointly by All Defendants. (House, Briane) |
|
Filing 21
ORDER - Plaintiff has filed an Amended Complaint alleging that this Court has diversity jurisdiction over this matter, and Defendants have now filed an Answer. While Plaintiff's Amended Complaint properly pleads factual allegations supporting the existence of diversity jurisdiction, Defendants' Answer either denies some or all of those allegations, or states that Defendants do not have sufficient information to admit those allegations. This leaves the Court unable to determine whether the facts upon which diversity jurisdiction is based are disputed. The Court is not being hyper- technical: Counsel has a professional obligation to analyze subject-matter jurisdiction, Heinen v. Northrop Grumman Corp., 671 F.3d 669, 670 (7th Cir. 2012), and a federal court always has a responsibility to ensure that it has jurisdiction, Hukic v. Aurora Loan Servs., 588 F.3d 420, 427 (7th Cir. 2009). The Court must know the details of the underlying jurisdictional allegations because parties cannot confer jurisdiction on the Court simply by stipulating that it exists. See Evergreen Square of Cudahy v. Wisconsin Housing and Economic Development Authority, 776 F.3d 463, 465 (7th Cir. 2015) ("the parties' united front is irrelevant since the parties cannot confer subject- matter jurisdiction by agreement...and federal courts are obligated to inquire into the existence of jurisdiction sua sponte"). Accordingly, in order for the Court to determine whether it has diversity jurisdiction over this matter, the parties are ORDERED to conduct whatever investigation is necessary and file a joint jurisdictional statement by December 21, 2020, properly setting forth each party's citizenship and whether the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs. If agreement cannot be reached on the contents of a joint jurisdictional statement, competing statements must be filed by that date. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 11/30/2020. (JDC)
|
| Filing 20 ANSWER to #14 Amended Complaint , filed by DEBORAH HUDSON MAAR, MEGAN MAAR, SARAH MAAR, EMILY MAAR ST. CHARLES.(Cowgur, Anne) |
| Filing 19 Interpleader Deposit Received (28 U.S.C. Section 1335) from New York Life Insurance Company in the amount of $1,073,868.87, receipt no. IP071423. (REO) |
| Filing 18 Interpleader Deposit Received (28 U.S.C. Section 1335) from New York Life Insurance Company in the amount of $2,147,737.75, receipt no. IP071422. (REO) |
|
Filing 17
ORDER FOR RELIEF IN INTERPLEADER - SEE ORDER granting Joint Motion for Relief in Interpleader #16 . Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 10/22/2020. (JDH)
|
| Filing 16 Joint MOTION for Interpleader Relief, filed by Plaintiff NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order Order for Relief in Interpleader)(Howard, Kimberly) |
| Filing 15 NOTICE of Automatic Enlargement of Time, filed by Defendants DEBORAH HUDSON MAAR, MEGAN MAAR, SARAH MAAR, EMILY MAAR ST. CHARLES (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order) (Cowgur, Anne) |
| Filing 14 AMENDED COMPLAINT against All Defendants, filed by NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A- Certificate, #2 Exhibit B- Application)(Howard, Kimberly) |
| Filing 13 NOTICE of Appearance by Anne L. Cowgur on behalf of Defendant DEBORAH HUDSON MAAR. (Cowgur, Anne) |
| Filing 12 NOTICE of Appearance by Briane M. House on behalf of Defendants DEBORAH HUDSON MAAR, MEGAN MAAR, SARAH MAAR, EMILY MAAR ST. CHARLES. (House, Briane) |
| Filing 11 RETURN of Service by CMRRR, filed by NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY. EMILY MAAR ST. CHARLES served on 9/26/2020. (Howard, Kimberly) |
| Filing 10 RETURN of Service by CMRRR, filed by NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY. MEGAN MAAR served on 9/26/2020. (Howard, Kimberly) |
| Filing 9 RETURN of Service by CMRRR, filed by NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY. SARAH MAAR served on 9/26/2020. (Howard, Kimberly) |
| Filing 8 RETURN of Service by CMRRR, filed by NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY. DEBORAH HUDSON MAAR served on 9/28/2020. (Howard, Kimberly) |
|
Filing 7
ORDER - The Court ORDERS Plaintiff to file an Amended Complaint by October 14, 2020, which addresses the issues outlined in this Order and properly alleges a basis for this Court's diversity jurisdiction. Defendants need not answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint at which this Order is directed. Defendants are cautioned, however, that when they do respond to the Amended Complaint, and to the extent that they deny any of Plaintiff's jurisdictional allegations or state that they do not have sufficient information to respond to those allegations, the Court will require the parties to conduct whatever investigation is necessary and file a joint jurisdictional statement confirming that all parties are in agreement with the underlying jurisdictional allegations before the litigation moves forward. SEE ORDER. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 9/29/2020.(JDH)
|
| Filing 6 PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES before Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson. (JDH) |
| Filing 5 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (AKH) |
| Filing 4 Summons Issued as to DEBORAH HUDSON MAAR, SARAH MAAR, MEGAN MAAR, EMILY MAAR ST. CHARLES. (AKH) Modified on 9/29/2020 (JDH). |
| Filing 3 Corporate Disclosure Statement by NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY. (Howard, Kimberly) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE of Appearance by Kimberly E. Howard on behalf of Plaintiff NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY. (Howard, Kimberly) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT for INTERPLEADER against All Defendants, filed by NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY. (Filing fee $400, receipt number 0756-6191978) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A- Certificate, #2 Exhibit B- Application, #3 Civil Cover Sheet, #4 Proposed Summons)(Howard, Kimberly) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Indiana Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
