Lisa Strausa v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company of Bloomington, Illinois

79 F.3d 1154 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Lisa STRAUSA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY OF BLOOMINGTON, ILLINOIS, Defendant-Appellee. No. 94-55702. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Nov. 17, 1995. Decided March 11, 1996. 1 Before: BRUNETTI and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges, and HAGEN, District Judge. * 2 MEMORANDUM ** 3 Appellant (Strausa) sued appellee, her automobile insurance carrier (State Farm), in California state court for breach of insurance contract and for various torts associated with State Farm's handling of her claim. 4 State Farm removed the action to federal court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441 on the ground of diversity under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 . The district court granted summary judgment on all claims to State Farm, and this appeal followed. This Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . ANALYSIS I. Subject Matter Jurisdiction 5 Strausa challenges…