## Facts

- A motor-vehicle collision occurred in Muskegon County, Michigan on December 5, 1998.
- Thelma Grace Morrison was driving a vehicle owned by The Hertz Corporation under a rental agreement.
- The other vehicle was driven by Brian A. Edgerton, Jr., age 15, allegedly unlicensed; Gerald R. Parker, Jr. was an occupant and the apparent owner.
- Parker filed a state-court negligence action against Morrison, Hertz, and others, alleging Morrison failed to obey a stop sign.
- Edgerton’s counsel later made a monetary demand but Edgerton did not join Parker’s state action; as a minor, Edgerton had an extended limitations period.
- Morrison and Hertz filed a federal diversity action seeking a declaratory judgment that Parker and Edgerton could not recover due to Michigan statutory bars (including alleged lack of insurance and permitting an unlicensed minor to drive).
- The matter was referred to a magistrate judge, who recommended dismissal as an improper use of federal declaratory relief.
- Plaintiffs submitted general, nonspecific objections that largely incorporated earlier briefing by reference.

## Issues

1. Whether the court should exercise discretionary jurisdiction under the Declaratory Judgment Act over a suit by alleged tortfeasors seeking a declaration of nonliability while related state tort litigation was pending or available.

## Decision

- The court adopted the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation.
- The court held plaintiffs’ generalized objections did not warrant further review under governing Sixth Circuit authority.
- Applying Sixth Circuit discretionary factors for declaratory actions, the court declined to exercise jurisdiction.
- The action was dismissed without prejudice.

## Legal Principles

- The Declaratory Judgment Act confers substantial discretion on federal courts to decide whether to entertain an action for declaratory relief.
- In the Sixth Circuit, courts evaluate discretionary jurisdiction using factors that include whether declaratory relief would (1) settle the controversy, (2) clarify legal relations, (3) be used for procedural fencing, (4) increase federal–state friction, or (5) create unnecessary entanglement with state proceedings.
- Declaratory actions by putative tortfeasors seeking declarations of nonliability, especially where state tort litigation is pending or readily available, generally weigh against exercising federal declaratory jurisdiction.
- Non-specific objections to a magistrate judge’s recommendation may be treated as no objection, permitting adoption of the recommendation.

## Conclusion

The court dismissed, without prejudice, a diversity declaratory-judgment action brought by alleged tortfeasors seeking a nonliability declaration because related state-law personal-injury litigation provided the appropriate forum and the Sixth Circuit’s discretionary factors weighed against federal intervention.


Morrison v. Parker, 90 F. Supp. 2d 876 (W.D. Mich. 2000)