BRUSH
v.
WORLD FIRE & MARINE INS. CO.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
District court denied motion to remand insurance policy breach suit, holding that interest recoverable on the policy amount satisfies federal jurisdictional amount requirement under Continental Casualty Co. v. Spradlin, approved by the Supreme Court.
Interest recoverable on an insurance policy amount constitutes part of the claim for purposes of federal jurisdictional amount requirements.
[1] Interest accruing on an insurance policy amount is properly included in calculating whether the amount in controversy satisfies federal question jurisdiction requirements…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff sued on an insurance policy with a face value of $3,000, claiming damages of $5,000 in the ad damnum clause. The parties conceded plaintiff …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Amount In Controversy cases and more on FLexlaw
This cause comes before the court on a motion to remand the same to the state court for want of jurisdiction of this court, the question being whether the jurisdictional amount is embraced in the cause of action as laid by the plaintiff in his declaration. The suit is in statutory form for an action upon policy of insurance. The insurance policy is in the sum of $3,000, and in the ad damnum clause damages are claimed in the sum of $5,000.
It is conceded in this cause of action the plaintiff may recover the sum of $3,000', with interest thereon at the rate of 8 per cent, per annum, and the plaintiff claims that any sum that might be recovered in excess of $3,000 would be interest within the meaning of the act of Congress fixing the jurisdiction of this court, while the defendant claims that any amount that might be recovered in excess of $3,000 would be a part of the damages recovered for a breach of a contract, and would not be, technically speaking, interest.
Whatever might be the opinion of this court, as an original proposition, I am unable to distinguish this case from the ease of Continental Casualty Co. v. Spradlin (C. C. A.) 170 F. 322, and inasmuch as the above ease has received at least the tacit approval of the Supreme Court of the United States in the ease of Springstead v. Crawfordsville State Bank, 231 U. S. 541, 34 S. Ct. 195, 58 L. Ed. 354, I feel that I am bound by thé decision of the Circuit Court of Appeals of the Fourth Circuit, thus approved by the Supreme Court of the United States, and therefore the motion to remand must be denied.