Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

BELLOW v. UTICA NATL. INS. CO.

December 8, 1988

GARY BELLOW
v.
UTICA NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: POLLAK

 POLLAK, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 Defendant removed this insurance contract dispute from the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas. Plaintiff has now moved to remand the action to state court. He bases this motion solely on the fact that this matter commenced, not from the filing of a formal complaint, but only from a "Petition for appointment of arbitrator" pursuant to the state uniform arbitration act, 42 Pa.C.S. § 7301 et seq. Plaintiff, citing Antonucci v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., Slip Op., No. 84-4111 (E.D. Pa. Nov. 1, 1984), claims that this petition is insufficient to create a removable "civil action brought in a State court" under 28 U.S.C. § 1441 governing removal of actions.

 In Manze v. State Farm Insurance Co., 817 F.2d 1062 (3d Cir. 1987), plaintiff had filed a similar petition for appointment of a neutral arbitrator of an insurance dispute under Pennsylvania law. The Court of Appeals regarded this "initial pleading" not only as sufficient to support defendant's subsequent removal to federal court, but also observed that the running of the thirty-day filing period for removal began with the filing of that petition. Id. at 1069. See also C. Wright, A. Miller & E. Cooper, 14A Federal Practice and Procedure § 3732, at 524 (noting that the initiation of a state court arbitration proceeding may meet "the requirement of a 'civil action brought in a State court'" for removal purposes).

 Defendant's petition for removal properly alleges the elements of diversity jurisdiction, which plaintiff does not rebut. Therefore, it is hereby ORDERED and DIRECTED that plaintiff's motion for remand is DENIED.

19881208

© 1992-2004 VersusLaw ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.