Penn Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Rufer
- Katherine Menendez
- 0:18-cv-01655
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 3
In Penn Mutual v. Rufer, Judge Menendez granted the fee motion as provided, awarded $4,000, allowed a $71,371 deposit, discharged Penn Mutual, and dismissed it with prejudice.
Penn Mutual received $4,000 in fees and costs, was allowed to deposit $71,371, was discharged from further liability concerning those funds, and was dismissed with prejudice. Myrna J. Rufer, Stephen Rufer, and Leslie Bock were affected because the available fund was reduced by the fee award.
What happened
Penn Mutual Life Insurance Company brought an interpleader case involving life-insurance death benefits and asked to deposit the money with the court, be released from liability, and be dismissed. It also requested $8,310 for attorney’s fees and costs.
Myrna J. Rufer, Stephen Rufer, and Leslie Bock did not dispute that Penn Mutual could receive fees and costs, but argued that the requested amount was too high. The court considered the $75,371 fund and Penn Mutual’s billing records.
Judge Menendez granted Penn Mutual’s motion as provided in the order, awarded $4,000 in fees and costs, allowed Penn Mutual to deposit $71,371, discharged it from further liability concerning the deposited funds, and dismissed Penn Mutual with prejudice.
The detailed version
- Penn Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Rufer · No. 0:18-cv-01655
- Katherine Menendez
- Feb. 4, 2019
Background
Penn Mutual brought an interpleader action concerning death benefits under a life-insurance policy. Interpleader allows a stakeholder that claims no interest in disputed funds to place them with the court while the competing defendants resolve who should receive them. Penn Mutual asked to deposit the policy benefit, be discharged from liability concerning distribution of the benefit, and be dismissed from the action. It also moved for $8,310 in attorney’s fees and costs.
Myrna J. Rufer, Stephen Rufer, and Leslie Bock did not contest Penn Mutual’s entitlement to an award, but argued that the requested amount was excessive. The opinion states that Penn Mutual met the requirements for recovering fees and costs because it was a disinterested stakeholder, had conceded liability, had deposited the funds or sought permission to do so, and had sought a discharge from liability.
Fee Award
The court held that the fees and costs had to be reasonable. It found that the hourly rates charged by two Foley & Mansfield attorneys—$250 and $175 per hour—were reasonable for the action. But the court concluded that a reasonable award was $4,000, not the requested $8,310. It also excluded fees incurred in trying to recover a fee award. The court considered the $75,371 fund and found that a larger award could reduce the amount available to the party or parties ultimately entitled to the fund.
Order and Disposition
The court granted Penn Mutual’s Motion for Award of Attorneys’ Fees and Leave to Deposit Funds with the Court as provided in the order. It granted Penn Mutual leave to deposit $71,371, representing the policy benefit less $4,000 in fees and costs. The court discharged Penn Mutual from further liability concerning the funds to be deposited and dismissed Penn Mutual from the action with prejudice. Judge Katherine Menendez directed that judgment be entered accordingly.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.
Related cases
- Triple S Farms LLC, Green Acres Dairy, LLC, Charles Fry and Emily Snyder, Rocky…Jul 2026
- United States Securities and Exchange Commission v. Carebourn Capital, L.P…Mar 2026
- Event Sales, Inc. v. The TJX Companies, Inc.; Federal Express Corporation…Feb 2026
- J.V.v. Asset Vision
- Stotesberyv. Muy Pizza-Tejas
- Paula A.v. O'Malley