28 U.S.C. § 1397
Interpleader
Any civil action of interpleader or in the nature of interpleader under section 1335 of this title may be brought in the judicial district in which one or more of the claimants reside.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 87
cases (19 in the last 5 years), 1950–2025 · leading case: First Trust Corp. v. Brenda Fuston Petrey Bryant, Kay Hamlin, Intervening, 410 F.3d 842 (1st Cir. 2005).
First Trust Corp. v. Brenda Fuston Petrey Bryant, Kay Hamlin, Intervening, 410 F.3d 842 (1st Cir. 2005). “First Trust contended venue was appropriate in Colorado under 28 U.S.C. § 1397 , which governs, venue, for interpleader actions, because it was a “claimant” to the funds and a citizen of Colorado.”
Mudd v. Yarbrough, 786 F. Supp. 2d 1236 (E.D. Ky. 2011). “2002) (citing 28 U.S.C. §§ 1397 , 2361). Most importantly, statuto-' ry interpleader grants district courts “original jurisdiction of any civil action of interpleader or in the nature of interpleader” if three elements are satisfied.”
Madison Stock Transfer, Inc. v. Exlites Holdings Int'l, Inc., 368 F. Supp. 3d 460 (E.D.N.Y 2019). “All Defendants have requested that Madison Stock Transfer perform transfer agent activities in its place of business without leaving the county of Kings in the State of New York. Plaintiff Madison Stock Transfer has no offices outside of the Kings county and does not travel for…”
State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Tashire, 386 U.S. 523 (1967). “Whereas statutory interpleader may be brought in the district where any claimant resides ( 28 U. S. C. § 1397 ), Rule interpleader based upon diversity of citizenship may be brought only in the district where all plaintiffs or all defendants reside ( 28 U.”
Big Island Yacht Sales, Inc. v. Dowty, 848 F. Supp. 131 (D. Haw. 1993). “Venue considerations for a statutory inter-pleader action are controlled by 28 U.S.C. § 1397 , which states: Any civil action of interpleader or in the nature of interpleader under section 1335 of this title may be brought in the judicial district in which one or more of the…”
Sun Life Assur. Co. of Canada,(us) v. Conroy, 431 F. Supp. 2d 220 (D.R.I. 2006). “§ 1335 and that venue is appropriate in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1397 as one or more of the defendants reside in this district).”
Wells Fargo Bank v. Mesh Suture, 31 F.4th 1300 (10th Cir. 2022). “; see also 28 U.S.C. §§ 1397 , 2361. 11 Appellate Case: 21-1262 Document: 010110672787 Date Filed: 04/19/2022 Page: 12 Aplee.”
New Jersey Sports Prods., Inc. v. Don King Prods., Inc., 15 F. Supp. 2d 534 (D.N.J. 1998). “at 498-99 ; 28 U.S.C. § 1397 ; see also American Family Mut.”
Carolina Cas. Ins. v. Mares, 826 F. Supp. 149 (E.D. Va. 1993). “§ 1335 is governed by 28 U.S.C. § 1397 , which provides that “[a]ny civil action of interpleader or in the nature of interpleader under section 1335 of this title may be brought in the judicial district in which one or more of the claimants reside.”
AmGuard Ins. Co. v. SG Patel & Sons II LLC, 999 F.3d 238 (4th Cir. 2021). “Also, 28 U.S.C. § 1397 provides liberalized venue for § 1335 actions, and 28 U.”
Nevada Ex Rel. Colorado River Comm'n of Nevada v. Pioneer Companies, Inc., 245 F. Supp. 2d 1120 (D. Nev. 2003). “See 28 U.S.C. § 1397 . A statutory interpleader action “may [only] be brought in the judicial district in which one or more of the claimants reside.”
Jackson Nat'l Life Ins. v. Economou, 557 F. Supp. 2d 216 (D.N.H. 2008). “28 U.S.C. § 1397 . JNL has effected valid service of process on interpleader defendant Cecile C.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.