Willie D. Martin, Jr. v. Gill E. Williams, USAA Casualty Insurance Co., State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., and Great American Insurance Company

Civil Action No. 2:25-cv-701 (E.D. Va. 2026) · United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Norfolk Division · March 20, 2026 · No. 2:25-cv-701

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia grants the plaintiff’s motion to amend and Great American Insurance Company’s motion to realign parties, while denying the plaintiff’s motion to remand. The court realigns Williams, USAA, State Farm, and Mr. G Trucking as co-plaintiffs because they share an interest in obtaining a declaration that Great American’s policy provides coverage for the underlying automobile-accident liability. The court concludes that complete diversity remains and that federal subject-matter jurisdiction is proper.

Holdings

  1. Leave to amend was appropriate because joining Mr. G Trucking, LLC was not futile, prejudicial, or undertaken in bad faith, and the amendment would not unduly complicate the litigation.
  2. Williams, USAA, and State Farm were properly realigned as plaintiffs because they shared Martin's primary interest in obtaining a declaration that Great American's policy covered potential liability arising from the accident.
  3. Mr. G Trucking, LLC was properly realigned as a plaintiff because it shared the other aligned parties' interest in obtaining a declaration concerning Great American's coverage obligation.
  4. Remand was unwarranted because, after realignment, complete diversity existed between the parties.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Martin should be granted leave under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) to amend the complaint and join Mr. G Trucking, LLC.
  2. Whether Williams, USAA, and State Farm should be realigned as plaintiffs based on their common interest in obtaining a declaration that Great American's policy covers liability arising from the accident.
  3. Whether Mr. G Trucking, LLC should also be realigned as a plaintiff rather than joined as a defendant.
  4. Whether the amended and realigned party configuration preserved complete diversity jurisdiction and required remand to state court.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (14)

  • Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Servs., Inc., 545 U.S. 546, 552 (2005)(followed)
  • United States v. Poole, 531 F.3d 263, 274 (4th Cir. 2008)(followed)
  • Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994)(followed)
  • Treacy v. Newdunn Assocs., L.L.P., 344 F.3d 407, 410-11 (4th Cir. 2003)(followed)
  • Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for S. Cal., 436 U.S. 1, 13 (1983)(followed)
  • Mulcahey v. Columbia Organic Chems. Co., 29 F.3d 148, 151 (4th Cir. 1994)(followed)
  • Marshall v. Manville Sales Corp., 6 F.3d 229, 232 (4th Cir. 1993)(followed)
  • Hogge v. Stephens, No. 3:09CV582, 2010 WL 3834856, at *8 (E.D. Va. Sept. 24, 2010), aff'd, 469 F. App'x 160 (4th Cir. 2012)(followed)
  • Williams v. Wilkerson, 90 F.R.D. 168, 10 (E.D. Va. 1981)(followed)
  • Correa v. Caliber Bodyworks of Virginia, LLC, No. 3:23-CV-00578 (MRC), 2024 WL 37207 (E.D. Va. Jan. 3, 2024)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 14.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…