United States District Court, E.D. California, Sacramento Division
JUDGMENT OF DISCHARGE IN INTERPLEADER
WILLIAM B. SHUBB UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
review and approval of the Stipulation and Order for Entry of
Judgment, it appearing that this Court has jurisdiction of
the parties and the subject matter set forth in Plaintiff
Securian Life Insurance Company's Complaint in
Interpleader filed in this action, and for good cause
appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED
Securian Life Insurance Company (“Securian Life”)
issued group term life insurance policy number 70083 (the
“Policy”) as a part of Allstate Insurance
Company's employee welfare benefit plan governed by the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974
(“ERISA”). The Policy provides certain group
insurance coverage to eligible employees of Allstate
Insurance Company, and the Decedent was an eligible employee.
Under the ERISA plan, the Policy provides that Securian Life
will pay death benefits to the beneficiary or beneficiaries
designated by the covered employee at the time of his or her
death if the terms, conditions, and provisions of the policy
have been satisfied. The death benefits under the Policy
payable by reason of the Decedent's death, and subject to
this interpleader action, are $536, 000.00.
prior to, and until, November 2016, the Decedent designated
Catalina Hillestad as the primary beneficiary and his minor
daughter (A.H.) as secondary beneficiary for the Policy.
Thereafter, the Decedent changed the beneficiary designation
for the Policy and designated the Hillestad Trust dated
12-1-2008 as the primary beneficiary; no contingent
beneficiary was designated. When Decedent passed away on
August 25, 2018, the Hillestad Trust dated 12-1-2008 was the
designated primary beneficiary for the Policy (with Pamela
Hillestad listed as the trustee).
shortly after the Decedent's death, on or about August
30, 2018, Securian Life received notice of the Decedent's
death and opened a claim for death benefits under the Policy.
between August 30, 2018 and January 31, 2019, Securian Life
made several efforts to obtain information related to the
Hillestad Trust dated 12-1-2008, as well as sufficient proof
of death. On January 31, 2019, Securian Life received a copy
of the death certificate regarding the Decedent.
with respect to the death benefits, Securian Life has
received and/or is otherwise on notice of competing and
adverse claims to the death benefits. The primary beneficiary
under the Policy, as designated by the Decedent, is the
Hillestad Trust dated 12-1-2008 (with Pamela Hillestad
identified as trustee). Catalina Hillestad claims that she is
entitled to the death benefits and that the Hillestad Trust
dated 12-1-2008 does not exist. Thus, Securian Life is unable
to pay the death benefits without being exposed to the risk
of double or multiple liability and/or contravening
Allstate's ERISA governed employee welfare benefits plan.
on February 11, 2019, Securian Life filed a Complaint in
Interpleader in this Court.
this case is at issue because the defendants have appeared or
had a default entered. See, Answer to Complaint at
Dkt. No. 6 and Entry of Default at Dkt. No. 9.
on July 26, 2019, Securian Life deposited $525, 094.69
(consisting of $536, 000.00 death benefits less $15, 780.71
(Securian Life's fees and costs) plus applicable
interest) into the Court's Registry.
Securian Life is a disinterested stakeholder and is
indifferent to which defendant or defendants are entitled to
the death benefits payable under the Policy.
That Securian Life is a citizen of the state of Minnesota,
and all defendants are citizens of the State of California.
That the amount in controversy in this action exceeds $75,
000 because the subject death benefits total $536, 000.00.
That this Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1332 and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
Rule 22 because Securian Life is diverse in citizenship from
each and every defendant and the amount in controversy
exceeds $75, 000. “Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 22
permits interpleader action if the amount in controversy
exceeds $75, 000 and if there is complete diversity between
the stakeholder and all of the claimants, even if some of the
claimants are citizens of the same state.”
Prudential Ins. Co. v. Wells, 2009 ...