Clarke E. Davenport v. Mutual Benefit Health & Accident Association and Continental Casualty Company

Good Law
325 F.2d 785·1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 3366
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 23, 196318780California1,526 words

Opinion

Opinion

Barnes, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment dismissing the action below for lack of jurisdiction. An appeal lies here (28 U.S. C.A. § 1291). The action below relies for jurisdiction upon diversity (28 U.S. C.A. § 1332). Defendant’s answer claims the amount in controversy does not exceed $10,000. Plaintiff urges it does.

Plaintiff set forth an action at law for deceit against the two defendant insurance companies, alleging they had defrauded him out of the benefits under his sickness and accident policies by representing to him that his condition was neither sickness nor accident and would not come within the policy coverage, thereby for a small amount of money obtaining his release from all future liability under these policies, although at the time both companies knew his condition was within the policy coverage, and that he would inevitably become entitled to large payments thereunder. Plaintiff claimed as damages not only the expected benefits from these policies which were less than $10,000, but also exemplary damages, making the total amount of damages claimed against both companies the sum of $100,000 (Tr. I, pp. 1, 2,11, 12).

The answers of both defendants admitted the contracts…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.