Skip to Navigation
The Collaborative Clearinghouse for Lawsuits and Other Claims Against ACE Group Insurance Companies

TURNER et al v. INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA

ATTENTION: It is possible that this information may no longer be current and therefore may be inaccurate. The index contains both open and closed cases and is not a complete list of cases in which an ACE Insurance Group company is involved. This information is provided to give interested persons an idea of the issues disputed in the indexed cases. For a full understanding of a case, one should read the rest of the court file, including the response. For the most up-to-date and complete information on a case, visit www.pacer.gov or contact the clerk of the relevant court.

Case Number: 
8:14-cv-02411 Search Pacer
ACE Group party(s): 
Opposing Party: 
Roy Turner
Court Type: 
Federal
US District Court: 
Middle District of Florida
Date Filed: 
Sep 24 2014

NOW the Defendant, INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA
("INA"), by and through its undersigned counsel and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1332;
§1441 and §1446 and hereby files its Notice of the Removal of the captioned matter
from the Circuit Court of the Sixth Judicial Circuit in and for Pinellas County, Florida to
this Honorable Court for the following reasons and authorities:
1. On September 2, 2014, ROY TURNER and MADELINE CONNOR
(hereinafter collectively referred to as "the Plaintiffs") filed their Complaint for Breach of
Contract and Demand for Jury Trial in the Circuit Court of the Sixth Judicial Circuit in
and for Pinellas County, Florida. (See the Plaintiffs' Summons and Complaint, as well
as the Defendant's Notice of Appearance and Motion for Enlargement of Time attached
hereto as Composite Exhibit "1").
2. The Plaintiffs make claim against INA for breach of a marine insurance
contract for physical damages sustained to their 2001 47' Silverton vessel. The subject
policy provides an agreed value of $276,000.00 in the event of a total loss to the vessel,
subject to a $5,520.00 deductible.
3. INA is corporation organized and existing under the laws of Pennsylvania;
is a citizen of the State of Pennsylvania and maintains its principal place of business in
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. (See Florida Department of State Division of Corporations
Detail by Entity print out attached hereto as Exhibit "2").1
4. Attached hereto as Composite Exhibit "3" is a copy of the Declarations
Page and insurance policy that was issued by INA to the Plaintiffs in order to insure
risks on the subject vessel.2
5. In Paragraph 11 of their Complaint, the Plaintiffs allege that "[o]n or about
March 17, 2012, TURNER and CONNOR'S vessel and personal property situated
therein which were insured pursuant to the terms and conditions as set forth in Exhibit
"C" suffered accidental direct physical loss and damages." The Plaintiffs do not,
however, plead the actual amount of damages that they are seeking in this cause.
6. On April 9, 2012, Plaintiff, MADELINE CONNOR, signed and verified a
"Vessel Owners or Masters Protest" attesting that the estimated cost to repair the
subject vessel was $300,000.00. (Exhibit "4").
1ln Paragraphs 1 and 2 of their Complaint, the Plaintiffs allege that they are citizens of the State of Florida
and that INA is organized and existing under the laws of the state other than Florida. Accordingly, there is
a complete diversity of citizenship between the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1332.
2For reasons which will become clearer during the discovery phase of this case, INA notes that it had
inadvertently provided the Plaintiffs with the wrong policy form "MA-14558a (04/05)" in response to their
request for insurance information. However, as noted in the Declarations Pages contained in Exhibits "1"
and "3" hereto, the actual policy form that was provided to the Plaintiffs to insure risks on the subject
vessel was "MA-14588b (04/10)."
7. INA received an "Estimating Worksheet" stating that it would cost
$258,893.17 to repair the subject vessel. (Exhibit "5").
8. Given that the agreed value for the subject vessel under the INA policy
sued upon is $276,000.00; that Plaintiff, MADELINE CONNER, executed a document
noting estimated repair cost of $300,000.00 and that INA received an estimate to repair
the subject vessel in the amount of $258,893.17, it is clear that the Plaintiffs' are
seeking to recover an amount from INA in excess the $75,000.00 jurisdictional threshold
of this Honorable Court.
WHEREFORE, based upon the foregoing, INA respectfully submits that
jurisdiction of this cause is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1332 and hereby requests this
Honorable Court to accept jurisdiction thereof.

The provided text is an excerpt from a document filed in this case. For a full understanding of the case, one should read the complete court file, including the response.

Javascript is required to view this map.