Preview:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY OWENSBORO DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:11-CV-00068-JHM STEVE COLDREN and JAYE H. COLDREN, on behalf of the Steven M. Coldren Irrevocable Trust, V. AMERICAN GENERAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY and LAWRENCE A. RASCHE MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on Defendant American General Life Insurance's motion to transfer this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1406(a) [DN 10] and Plaintiffs Steve Coldren and Jaye Coldren's Rule 42 motion to consolidate actions [DN 20]. Fully briefed, these matters are ripe for decision. For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS the Defendant's motion to transfer and DENIES Plaintiffs' motion to consolidate as moot. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiffs Steve Coldren and his wife, Jaye H. Coldren, residents of Boca Raton, Florida, filed this action against American General Life Insurance Company and Lawrence Rasche alleging various claims in connection with the sale of a life insurance policy. Lawrence Rasche, a resident of Evansville, Indiana, sold the Plaintiffs a premium financed life insurance policy through American General Life Insurance Company ("American General"), which is licensed to transact life DEFENDANTS PLAINTIFFS

insurance business in 48 states, including Florida, Indiana and Kentucky. The premiums for the life insurance policy were paid through financing Rasche obtained for the Plaintiffs from Old National Bank of Evansville, Indiana ("Old National"). Old National paid the premiums for the first two years but then was, apparently, no longer willing to finance Plaintiffs. Rasche was unable to find alternative financing for the premiums on Plaintiffs' policy and the policy lapsed. Old National has now called upon Plaintiffs to pay the principal and accumulated interest on the loan. The issue currently before the Court concerns the proper venue for this action. American General argues that the Western District of Kentucky is not the proper venue for this action. American General states that "[a]ll of the material transactions in this case took place in Indiana or Florida" and "this lawsuit lacks a substantial connection to Kentucky." (Def.'s Mot. to Transfer, 2 [DN 10].) Plaintiffs ask that the motion to transfer be denied because: (1) there are significant contacts in Kentucky, which include several witnesses they intend to call who reside in the Western District of Kentucky; (2) this district is the most convenient for accessing evidence; (3) this district is the locus of the operative facts; and (4) this district is already familiar with the legal and factual issues involved. (Pls.' Memo in Opposition to Mot. to Transfer [DN 17].) Additionally, Plaintiffs move the Court to consolidate this action with Warren C. Helton, et. al. v American General Life Insurance Company, et. al, No. 4:09-cv-118, which is currently pending in this Court. (Pls.' Rule 42 Mot. to Consolidate Actions, [DN 20].) II. DISCUSSION The general civil venue statute provides that a civil action may be brought in: (1) a judicial district in which any defendant resides, if all defendants are residents of the State in which the district is located; (2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is subject of the action is situated; or (3) if there is 2

no district in which an action may otherwise be brought as provided in this section, any judicial district in which any defendant is subject to the court's personal jurisdiction with respect to such action. 28 U.S.C.

Download 25000.pdf

Kentucky Law