United States: Third Circuit Clarifies Abstention Doctrine In Insurance Coverage Declaratory Action

Last Updated: September 8 2017
Article by Alex B. Silverman

Insurers looking to remove declaratory judgment actions to courts in the Third Circuit were recently given some clarity — and, for one defendant insurer, a welcome reversal. On August 21, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that the Eastern District of Pennsylvania abused its discretion by applying an overly broad definition of what constitutes a "parallel proceeding" in determining whether to abstain from hearing an action under the Declaratory Judgment Act (DJA). See Kelly, et al. v. Maxum Specialty Ins. Group, et al., No. 2:14-cv-07149 (3d Cir. Aug. 21, 2017). To "correct the error propagating among some of the district courts in this circuit," the Third Circuit declared that "the mere potential or possibility that two proceedings will resolve related claims between the same parties is not sufficient to make those proceedings parallel; rather, there must be a substantial similarity in issues and parties between contemporaneously pending proceedings."

The two suits at issue arose from a 2007 car accident in which Ronald Kelly was struck by a drunk driver. The driver had been drinking at a bar called Princeton Tavern, which was insured under a dram shop policy issued by State National Insurance Company ("State National"). That policy was procured by Princeton Tavern's broker, Carman Corporation ("Carman").

Ronald and Patrice Kelly (the "Kellys") filed a state court action against Princeton Tavern for injuries caused by the accident. Princeton Tavern alerted Carman of the action and requested that Carman tender coverage for the action to State National. Carman declined tender, and State National denied coverage for Princeton Tavern's $5 million settlement with the Kellys.

Following the denial, the Kellys, having been assigned the right to do so by Princeton Tavern, sued Carman in state court for negligence in failing to give notice to State National (the "Tort Action"). While the Tort Action was pending, the Kellys filed a separate state action against Carman and its professional liability insurer, Maxum Specialty Insurance Group ("Maxum"), seeking a declaration that Maxum had a duty to defend and indemnify Carman in the Tort Action (the "Declaratory Action").

When Maxum removed the Declaratory Action to federal court, the Kellys asked the district court to exercise its discretion under the DJA to decline jurisdiction and remand the case to state court. The district court obliged, finding that the tort action and the declaratory action were "parallel proceedings" because both "directly implicated Maxum's obligations to defend and indemnify [Carman]" and "the question of coverage ... will necessarily arise in the [tort action] before it is completed." Maxum appealed.

The key issue before the Third Circuit was the extent of the district court's discretion under the DJA to decline jurisdiction over a declaratory judgment action when a related state action is pending. The court's opinion focused primarily on the determination of when such actions are "parallel proceedings," the presence of which "militates significantly in favor of declining jurisdiction."

At the outset, the court noted that the district court, like many others in the Third Circuit, ruled that a state court action generally "parallels" a federal action when there is a "potential" that the federal claims will be decided in state court. By this decision, the Third Circuit formally rejected this approach, stating that, "[a]lthough the existence or non-existence of parallel proceedings is only one of many factors a court must consider, it is a significant factor, and we must correct the error propagating among some of the district courts in this circuit." The court declared that

[T]he mere potential or possibility that two proceedings will resolve related claims between the same parties is not sufficient to make those proceedings parallel; rather, there must be a substantial similarity in issues and parties between contemporaneously pending proceedings.

Citing decisions by other circuit courts of appeal, the court explained that "substantial similarity" exists when "the parties involved are closely related and ... the resolution of an issue in one [which] will necessarily settle the matter in the other." Elaborating, the court held that "[s]trict identity between parties and claims is not necessary for pending proceedings to be substantially similar," but that it will be a significant factor. Other relevant factors include "the scope of the state court proceeding, the claims and defenses asserted, and whether necessary parties had been or could be joined." In so holding, the court was influenced by standards it has used in other abstention contexts. For instance, in Ryan v. Johnson, 115 F.3d 193, 196 (3d Cir. 1997), the Third Circuit held that cases are "parallel" when they are "truly duplicative," meaning the parties and claims are "identical," or at least "effectively the same."

The Third Circuit court found that the two proceedings at issue were clearly not parallel because, among other reasons: (1) Maxum is not a party to the tort action; and (2) the questions of whether Maxum's policy covers Carman for its potential liability in the tort action, and whether Carman is in fact liable to the Kellys, are entirely distinct.

Indeed, the court acknowledged that the facts in Kelly are hardly unique. Citing cases from the Third, Fourth, Eighth and Sixth Circuits, the court highlighted that courts frequently find that coverage issues raised in federal declaratory judgment actions are distinct from the liability issues presented in concurrent state negligence proceedings. Accordingly, the court found no reason for the district court to abstain from hearing the declaratory action.

But irrespective of the outcome of the initial parallel proceedings analysis, the court stressed that a district court must still "rigorously" assure itself that the presence or absence of a parallel proceeding is not outweighed by opposing factors. Thus, before deciding whether to exercise or decline jurisdiction, the Third Circuit directed district courts to consider at least eight additional factors, including: (1) the likelihood that a federal court declaration will resolve the uncertainty of obligation giving rise to the controversy; (2) convenience of the parties; (3) public interest in settling the uncertainty of obligation; (4) availability and convenience of other remedies; (5) general policy of restraint when the same issues are pending in state court; (6) avoidance of duplicative litigation; (7) prevention of the use of the declaratory judgment action as a means of "procedural fencing," or as a means to provide another forum in a race for res judicata; and (8) in the insurance context, an inherent conflict of interest between an insurer's duty to defend in a state court action and its attempt to characterize that suit in federal court as being excluded by the subject policy. See Reifer v. Westport Ins. Corp., 751 F.3d 129, 134 n. 4 (3d Cir. 2014) (the "Reifer factors").

Here, the district court held that four of the Reifer factors weighed against exercising jurisdiction, while four were neutral. According to the Third Circuit, this decision was an abuse of discretion.

Having determined that the two actions here were in fact not parallel — significantly favoring the exercise of jurisdiction — the Third Circuit held that none of the Reifer factors weighed in favor of declining jurisdiction over the declaratory action. As such, the court reversed and remanded for confirmation that the parties to the declaratory action have complete diversity of citizenship.

This decision is no doubt welcome to insurers, who often find the deck is less stacked against them in federal court than in some state courts. Having found that the "potentiality" standard is overbroad, the Third Circuit's new "substantial similarity" test may have made it significantly more difficult for plaintiffs to remand declaratory judgment actions to state court.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions