Conrad

Conrad v. Ace Property

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 14, 200806-35539California3,476 words

Opinion

Opinion

BACKGROUND

Enacted in 1938, the Federal Crop Insurance Act (“Act” or “FCIA”), 7 U.S.C. § 1501 et seq., is designed to “promote the national welfare by improving the economic stability of agri- culture through a sound system of crop insurance and provid- ing the means for the research and experience helpful in devising and establishing such insurance,” id. § 1502(a). To administer the Act, Congress created the Federal Crop Insur- ance Corporation (“FCIC”), a government-owned corporation which acts as an “agency of and within the Department” of Agriculture (“USDA”). Id. § 1503; see also Fed. Crop Ins. 1 Because the district court had subject matter jurisdiction under § 1332, we need not inquire whether it also had federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331. CONRAD v. ACE PROPERTY & CASUALTY 8707 Corp. v. Merrill, 332 U.S. 380, 381 (1947). The FCIC is, in turn, regulated by the USDA’s Risk Management Agency (“RMA”). See Barnhill v. Veneman (In re Peanut Crop Ins. Litig.), 524 F.3d 458, 462 (4th Cir. 2008); Tex. Peanut Farm- ers v. United States, 409 F.3d 1370, 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2005); 7 C.F.R. § 400.701. The RMA’s function is to supervise the FCIC and administer…

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.