Catlin Insurance Company v. Champ Construction Company
- Lewis Liman
- 1:24-cv-04499
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Catlin v. Champ: Judge Liman dismissed Navigators without prejudice for lack of diversity jurisdiction while retaining the case against the remaining parties.
Navigators Insurance Company was dismissed from the case without prejudice. Catlin Insurance Company and the remaining defendants remain in the action, and the court retained jurisdiction over them.
What happened
In Catlin Insurance Company v. Champ Construction Company, Navigators Insurance Company asked to be dismissed because the court lacked diversity jurisdiction over Catlin’s claims against it. Catlin agreed that diversity was lacking but asked the court to dismiss only Navigators.
The court found that Catlin and Navigators both had their principal places of business in Connecticut, so complete diversity was missing. Because Navigators was not indispensable and no party objected, the court dismissed Navigators without prejudice and kept jurisdiction over the remaining defendants.
Judge Lewis J. Liman issued the order and directed the Clerk of Court to close Navigators’ dismissal motion.
The detailed version
- Catlin Insurance Company v. Champ Construction Company · No. 1:24-cv-04499
- Lewis Liman
- May 5, 2025
Background
Catlin Insurance Company sued Champ Construction Company and other defendants, including Navigators Insurance Company, also sued under the name “Navigators Specialty Insurance.” The action was based on diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
Navigators moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), which concerns the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction. Catlin conceded that diversity jurisdiction was lacking between Catlin and Navigators, but asked the court to dismiss Navigators alone and retain jurisdiction over the remaining parties.
Court’s Analysis
The court stated that Catlin is a Texas corporation with its principal place of business in Connecticut. Navigators submitted evidence showing that its principal place of business is in Hartford, Connecticut. Because the parties therefore did not have the complete diversity required by Section 1332, the court determined that jurisdiction was lacking between Catlin and Navigators.
The court explained that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 21 permits a court to drop a nondiverse party to preserve diversity jurisdiction when that party is not indispensable under Rule 19(b). No party argued that Navigators was indispensable. The court also noted that Navigators was a second-layer excess insurer for an insured defendant that had two primary insurers and a first-layer excess insurer. The court concluded that entering judgment without Navigators would not prejudice the remaining defendants.
Disposition
The court dismissed Navigators from the case without prejudice under Rule 21 and retained jurisdiction over the remaining parties. It directed the Clerk of Court to close Docket Entry 155, Navigators’ motion to dismiss.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.