Catt Michele Huth, an Individual v. The Hartford Insurance Company of the Midwest, an Indiana Corporation

On October 31, 2000, Hartford Insurance Company filed a federal declaratory judgment action seeking a declaration that Catt Michele Huth is not entitled to under-insured motorist benefits under her mother’s policy because she was not a resident of her mother’s household at the time of her automobile accident. On November 8, 2000, Huth filed a similar declaratory judgment action in Arizona state court claiming she is entitled to benefits. Hartford removed the state action to federal district court on the basis of diversity jurisdiction. 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (2002). The two cases were then consolidated.

Huth filed a motion to remand the removed state court action and to stay Hartford’s federal action. She urged the district court to decline jurisdiction under the Federal Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C.. § 2201(a) (2002). The district court granted Huth’s motion. Hartford timely appealed.

Analysis

Appellate Jurisdiction

As a general rule, “[a]n order remanding a case to the State court from which it was removed is not reviewable on appeal or otherwise....” 28 U.S.C. § 1447 (d) (2002). Huth, however, does not challenge subject matter jurisdiction or the validity of the…