Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Civil Procedure — diversity jurisdiction — aggregation

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//July 30, 2012//

Civil Procedure — diversity jurisdiction — aggregation

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//July 30, 2012//

Listen to this article

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.

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests