Crider v. Zurich Insurance Company

PETITIONER: Crider
RESPONDENT: Zurich Insurance Company
LOCATION: Criminal District Court, Parish of New Orleans

DOCKET NO.: 116
DECIDED BY: Warren Court (1962-1965)
LOWER COURT: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

CITATION: 380 US 39 (1965)
ARGUED: Jan 19, 1965
DECIDED: Mar 01, 1965

Facts of the case

Question

Media for Crider v. Zurich Insurance Company

Audio Transcription for Oral Argument - January 19, 1965 in Crider v. Zurich Insurance Company

Earl Warren:

Number 116, Thomas J. Crider, Petitioner, versus Zurich Insurance Company.

R. Foster Etheredge:

Mr. Chief Justice --

Earl Warren:

Mr. Etheredge.

R. Foster Etheredge:

-- may it please the Court.

On behalf of my brother and friend here, Mr. Max Pope, I'd like to request the Court to allow him to argue the case pro hac vice.

I understand that he likes approximately three weeks to possess the necessary three-year qualification as required by the rules of the Court.

Earl Warren:

The motion is granted.

Max C. Pope:

Mr. Chief Justice --

Earl Warren:

Mr. Pope.

Max C. Pope:

Thank you, sir.

Mr. Chief Justice, may it please the Court.

I appreciate the indulgence ago for letting me argue this case pro hac vice and I hope you're not ashamed of it or you ordered before you get food, before I get the food.

As I see this case, there are two issues under the facts that I'm about to recite.

Can a state create a transitory cause of action and so restrict it that only the state that created it can enforce this cause of action?

The answer -- the obvious answer to this is, no.

However, this no is qualified by the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the United States Constitution which is the next issue and, as I see it, the only issue that this Court has to decide.

Did the Alabama Court, in enforcing the Georgia statute, violate the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the United States Constitution?

Petitioner was awarded a judgment in a trial court in Alabama and the said judgment was based on the Georgia Workman's Compensation Law.

This was a default judgment.

No appeal was taken from this judgment.

This was in February of 1959.

We filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama against the respondent here who was the insurance carrier of the defendant in the Alabama trial court.

Potter Stewart:

Now, before you did that, didn't you try to sue on your judgment in the Alabama Circuit Court?

Max C. Pope:

Yes, sir.

I was not associated in this case until there was -- until I filed the complaint in the federal court.

Potter Stewart:

Not you, I didn't mean you, I meant the petitioner.

Max C. Pope:

It was -- right sir.

It was filed in the Court.

That is not in the record here, but we might as well bring it all out that it was not -- it's not in the record before the Court.

It is in the respondent's brief, but -- that this -- we are -- I'm willing to discuss that aspect of it.