Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
January 21, 1985, Argued ; April 25, 1985, Decided
[*690] CONTIE, Circuit Judge.
Wayne County and William Lucas appeal the judgment of the district court granting a declaratory judgment in favor of appellee Allstate Insurance Company pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201. Since we conclude that the district court lacked jurisdiction, we vacate [*691] the judgment of the district court and remand with instructions to dismiss.
This case arises from an altercation between Joseph Russo, a Wayne County deputy sheriff, and Christopher Graves in which Russo allegedly shot Graves. On December 10, [**2] 1980, Graves filed an action in the Circuit Court for the County of Wayne against Wayne County and Russo. Graves alleged that Russo, acting in his capacity as a deputy sheriff, had shot Graves intentionally, willfully, wantonly, and without just cause, or, in the alternative, that Russo had acted negligently. Graves also filed an action in federal court against Wayne County, Russo, Sheriff William Lucas and several other parties pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1983, 1985(3), 1986, alleging that Russo was acting under color of state law and in his official capacity when he shot Graves. Graves alleged that Russo shot him intentionally, willfully and wantonly, thereby depriving Graves of his civil rights by the shooting and the subsequent malicious prosecution. In July 1982, Russo demanded that appellee Allstate defend these actions pursuant to a homeowner's insurance policy issued by Allstate to Russo.
On December 3, 1982, Allstate filed the instant action against Russo, Graves, Wayne County, Lucas, the Wayne County prosecutor, a Wayne County deputy sheriff, the City of Southgate and two Southgate police officers. Allstate sought a declaratory judgment that Allstate was not obligated [**3] to defend or extend coverage to Russo in either the state or federal action. Allstate argued that the incident was not an "occurrence" as defined by the policy, that Russo had expected the injury, that the occurrence did not arise from an accident, and that the injury arose from Russo's participation in his business. Allstate asserted that defendants other than Russo had been joined "because they were in a position that their rights or obligations may be affected by the outcome of the instant suit."
On August 11, 1983, Allstate filed a motion for summary judgment. On March 30, 1984, the district court granted the motion against all defendants, concluding that the allegations of scope of employment in the state complaint and color of state law in the federal complaint required the application of the business pursuits exclusion of the insurance contract, and, therefore, Allstate had no duty to defend. 1
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
760 F.2d 689 *; 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 29216 **
ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee v. WAYNE COUNTY, et al., Defendants-Appellants
Prior History: [**1] On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan.
parties, insured, rights, district court, duty to defend, limitations, prudential, litigate, courts, cases, insurance company, federal court, obligations, ripe, threatened injury, injury in fact, state court, third party, adjudicate, indemnify, sheriff
Civil Procedure, Justiciability, Case & Controversy Requirements, Actual Controversy, General Overview, Declaratory Judgments, Federal Declaratory Judgments, Jurisdiction, Jurisdictional Sources, Constitutional Sources, Constitutional Law, The Judiciary, Case or Controversy, Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Jurisdiction Over Actions, Limited Jurisdiction, Standing, Elements, Preliminary Considerations, Criminal Law & Procedure, Theft & Related Offenses, Forgery, Particular Parties, Third Party Standing, Appeals, Reviewability of Lower Court Decisions, Insurance Law, Liability & Performance Standards, Good Faith & Fair Dealing, Duty to Defend, Torts, Types of Negligence Actions, Alcohol Providers, Dram Shop Acts, Remedies, Multiple Defendants, Contribution, Procedure, Relevant Parties, Claim, Contract & Practice Issues, Ripeness, Ripeness, Banking Law, Business & Corporate Compliance, Banking & Finance, Federal Credit Unions, Parties, Joinder of Parties, Permissive Joinder