By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//July 30, 2012//
By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//July 30, 2012//
United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit
Civil
Civil Procedure — diversity jurisdiction — aggregation
Aggregation of claims is allowed only in those situations where there is not only a common fund from which the plaintiffs seek relief, but where the plaintiffs also have a joint interest in that fund, such that plaintiffs’ rights are affected by the rights of co-plaintiffs.
“First, the potential proceeds from the Travelers policies do not qualify as a ‘common fund.’ The existence of a ‘common fund’ depends on the ‘nature of the right asserted, not whether successful vindication of the right will lead to a single pool of money that will be allocated among the plaintiffs.’ Gilman, 104 F.3d at 1427. Thus, a common fund exists when ‘plaintiffs share[ ] a preexisting (pre-litigation) interest in the subject of the litigation.’ Id. In this case, the Good class members did not share a pre-existing interest in recovery against Rogan Shoes or its insurers. The class members’ claims all arose from separate transactions. As the Second Circuit said in Gilman: ‘There is no fund. The claim remains one on behalf of separate individuals for the damage suffered by each due to the alleged conduct of the defendant.’ Id. (ellipses omitted), quoting Rock Drilling Local Union No. 17 v. Mason & Hanger Co., 217 F.2d 687, 695 (2d Cir. 1954).”
Affirmed as modified.
11-2790 Travelers Property Casualty v. Good
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Lefkow, J., Hamilton, J.