Wodecki v. Nationwide Insurance Co.

107 F.R.D. 118 (1985)

Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
W
From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Wodecki v. Nationwide Insurance Co.

United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
107 F.R.D. 118 (1985)

  • Written by Heather Whittemore, JD

Facts

Helen J. Wodecki (plaintiff), a citizen of Pennsylvania, had a health-insurance policy with Nationwide Insurance Co. (Nationwide) (defendant). After a hospitalization at Hamot Medical Center (Hamot), a Pennsylvania hospital, Wodecki filed an action in federal district court to recover health-insurance benefits from Nationwide. A jury awarded Wodecki $8,200. Hamot filed a claim to intervene in the lawsuit, asserting that Wodecki had assigned her rights to health-insurance benefits from Nationwide to Hamot. Hamot also filed a claim against Wodecki in state court seeking payment for her hospitalization. Hamot reasoned that it had a right to intervene in the case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(a)(2) because it had an interest in the insurance benefits that was not sufficiently represented by Wodecki or Nationwide. Wodecki opposed the intervention, arguing that her case with Nationwide was terminated when the district court entered judgment in her favor and that the district court did not have jurisdiction over Hamot’s claim for intervention because the requirements for diversity jurisdiction—an amount in controversy exceeding $10,000 and diversity among the parties—were not met.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Weber, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 810,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

Federal Courts

Key Terms