Securian Life Insurance Company v. Hillestad ( 2019 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 SACRAMENTO DIVISION 10 11 SECURIAN LIFE INSURANCE Case No. 2:19-CV-00257-WBS-AC 12 COMPANY, JUDGMENT OF DISCHARGE IN 13 Plaintiff, INTERPLEADER 14 v. 15 CATALINA HILLESTAD; PAMELA HILLESTAD, AS TRUSTEE OF THE 16 HILLESTAD TRUST DATED 12-1-2008; and DOES 1-15, 17 Defendants. 18 19 20 Upon review and approval of the Stipulation and Order for Entry of Judgment, it 21 appearing that this Court has jurisdiction of the parties and the subject matter set forth in 22 Plaintiff Securian Life Insurance Company’s Complaint in Interpleader filed in this action, and 23 for good cause appearing therefor, 24 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: 25 That Securian Life Insurance Company (“Securian Life”) issued group term life 26 insurance policy number 70083 (the “Policy”) as a part of Allstate Insurance Company’s 27 employee welfare benefit plan governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1 Allstate Insurance Company, and the Decedent was an eligible employee. Under the ERISA 2 plan, the Policy provides that Securian Life will pay death benefits to the beneficiary or 3 beneficiaries designated by the covered employee at the time of his or her death if the terms, 4 conditions, and provisions of the policy have been satisfied. The death benefits under the Policy 5 payable by reason of the Decedent’s death, and subject to this interpleader action, are 6 $536,000.00. 7 That prior to, and until, November 2016, the Decedent designated Catalina 8 Hillestad as the primary beneficiary and his minor daughter (A.H.) as secondary beneficiary for 9 the Policy. Thereafter, the Decedent changed the beneficiary designation for the Policy and 10 designated the Hillestad Trust dated 12-1-2008 as the primary beneficiary; no contingent 11 beneficiary was designated. When Decedent passed away on August 25, 2018, the Hillestad 12 Trust dated 12-1-2008 was the designated primary beneficiary for the Policy (with Pamela 13 Hillestad listed as the trustee). 14 That shortly after the Decedent’s death, on or about August 30, 2018, Securian 15 Life received notice of the Decedent’s death and opened a claim for death benefits under the 16 Policy. 17 That between August 30, 2018 and January 31, 2019, Securian Life made several 18 efforts to obtain information related to the Hillestad Trust dated 12-1-2008, as well as sufficient 19 proof of death. On January 31, 2019, Securian Life received a copy of the death certificate 20 regarding the Decedent. 21 That with respect to the death benefits, Securian Life has received and/or is 22 otherwise on notice of competing and adverse claims to the death benefits. The primary 23 beneficiary under the Policy, as designated by the Decedent, is the Hillestad Trust dated 12-1- 24 2008 (with Pamela Hillestad identified as trustee). Catalina Hillestad claims that she is entitled 25 to the death benefits and that the Hillestad Trust dated 12-1-2008 does not exist. Thus, Securian 26 Life is unable to pay the death benefits without being exposed to the risk of double or multiple 27 liability and/or contravening Allstate’s ERISA governed employee welfare benefits plan. 1 Court. 2 That this case is at issue because the defendants have appeared or had a default 3 entered. See, Answer to Complaint at Dkt. No. 6 and Entry of Default at Dkt. No. 9. 4 That on July 26, 2019, Securian Life deposited $525,094.69 (consisting of 5 $536,000.00 death benefits less $15,780.71 (Securian Life’s fees and costs) plus applicable 6 interest) into the Court’s Registry. 7 That Securian Life is a disinterested stakeholder and is indifferent to which 8 defendant or defendants are entitled to the death benefits payable under the Policy. 9 10. That Securian Life is a citizen of the state of Minnesota, and all defendants are 10 citizens of the State of California. 11 11. That the amount in controversy in this action exceeds $75,000 because the subject 12 death benefits total $536,000.00. 13 12. That this Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 and 14 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 22 because Securian Life is diverse in citizenship from 15 each and every defendant and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. “Federal Rule of 16 Civil Procedure 22 permits interpleader action if the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 and 17 if there is complete diversity between the stakeholder and all of the claimants, even if some of 18 the claimants are citizens of the same state.” Prudential Ins. Co. v. Wells, 2009 U.S. Dist. 19 LEXIS 43276, p.2 (N.D. Cal. May 21, 2009); see also, Gelfren v. Republic Nat’l. Life Ins. Co., 20 680 F.2d 79, 81, fn1 (9th Cir. 1982). 21 13. That this Court also has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant 28 U.S.C. § 1331 22 because the Policy is part of an employee welfare benefit plan which is governed by ERISA. 23 14. That Securian Life has properly filed the Complaint in Interpleader and stated a 24 proper cause for interpleader. 25 15. That having brought this action and deposited with the Court the subject death 26 benefits, plus accrued interest, and minus Securian Life’s fees and costs, in the amount of 27 $525,094.69, Securian Life, its predecessors, successors, affiliates, parent corporations, 1 || liability of any kind or nature whatsoever with respect to the terms of the Policy and/or Plan, the 2 || death benefits payable under the Policy and/or Plan, and/or the death of Decedent as to all 3 || claims, charges, demands, or otherwise that exist now or may arise at any time in the future. 4 16. That defendants are permanently enjoined from instituting or prosecuting any 5 || proceeding in any state or United States court against Securian Life, its predecessors, successors, affiliates, parent corporations, employees, officers and agents with respect to the terms of the Policy and/or Plan, the death benefits payable under the Policy and/or Plan, and/or the death of 8 || Decedent as to all claims, charges, demands, or otherwise that exist now or may arise at any 9 || time in the future. 10 17. That Securian Life is dismissed with prejudice from this action. 11 18. That this action shall proceed between the defendants. 12 19, That except for the prior stipulation and Order awarding fees and costs to Securian 13 || Life in the amount of $15,780.71, all parties are to bear their own fees and costs with respect to 14 || the order and judgment for discharge in interpleader and dismissal with prejudice as to Securian 15 || Life. 16 17 || Dated: September 6, 2019 he Lhe ak Dd. bE 18 WILLIAM B. SHUBB 19 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Daca Nan 310 CU NNIST WREe AC