Harriet M. Gould, an Unremarried Widow v. Mutual Life Insurance Company of New York, a Foreign Corporation

At issue are the competing concerns of the finality of judgments and the limited subject matter jurisdiction of federal courts. Mrs. Gould asks this court to reconsider its previous determination of subject matter jurisdiction. She contends that removal was improper and the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction. Her contentions fail because of the procedural posture of the case: the district court has entered final judgment against her; and the issues, including subject matter jurisdiction, have been litigated all the way to the Supreme Court. She would continue the controversy by having the case remanded to the state court. Having determined that our prior determination was correct, we hold that the district court was bound by the law of the case.

BACKGROUND

We summarized the facts in our earlier opinion:

Gould v. Mutual Life Insurance Co. of New York, 735 F.2d 1165, 1166 (9th Cir.1984), ce rt. denied, — U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 2023 , 85 L.Ed.2d 304 (1985).

Having prevailed on her policy claim, Gould, a Washington resident, sued in state court under the Washington Consumer Protection Act against two Washington attorneys and MONY, a New York corporation. The court…