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 Corporation v. Brenda Fuston Petrey Bryant, Kay Hamlin, Intervening
First Trust Corporation v. Brenda Fuston Petrey Bryant, Kay Hamlin, Intervening (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 (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. (2019)
“%20%C2%A7%201397"> 28 U.S.C. § 1397 , a statutory interpleader action "may be brought in the judicial district in which one or more of the claimants reside.”
State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Tashire (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 (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 (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 (2022)
“…provisions available in statutory interpleader. See id.; see also 28 U.S.C. §§ 1397 , 2361. 11 Appellate Case: 21-1262 Document: 010110672787 Date Filed: 04/19/2022 Page: 12 Aplee. App. (WFB) at 147. Mr. Schwartz’s only response is to”
New Jersey Sports Productions, Inc. v. Don King Productions, Inc. (1998)
“at 498-99 ; 28 U.S.C. § 1397 ; see also American Family Mut.”
Carolina Casualty Insurance v. Mares (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 Insurance Company v. SG Patel and Sons II LLC (2021)
“Also, 28 U.S.C. § 1397 provides liberalized venue for § 1335 actions, and 28 U.”
Nevada Ex Rel. Colorado River Commission of Nevada v. Pioneer Companies, Inc. (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 National Life Insurance v. Economou (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.