Sutton v. Agentra, 1:24-cv-00276

Kurt Sutton, an Indiana resident, sued Agentra, LLC (a Texas-based insurance broker) and TransAmerica Life Insurance Company (an Iowa-based insurer), alleging various state law claims related to a life insurance policy.
Sutton alleged that in 2017, Agentra arranged a $100,000 whole life policy for him with TransAmerica, provided a policy number, and started premium withdrawals from Sutton's bank account.
Over five years, Agentra continued to withdraw premiums, but when Sutton inquired in 2022 about the policy, Agentra could not confirm its existence or details.
The lawsuit was removed to federal court on diversity grounds, and Sutton twice amended the complaint.
TransAmerica moved to dismiss only the conversion claim (Count II) against it, arguing the complaint did not allege it controlled or possessed Sutton’s premiums.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Sutton stated a plausible claim for conversion against TransAmerica for insurance premium payments allegedly wrongfully withheld	Sutton claims both defendants are liable for the insurance premium monies, arguing the complaint pleads sufficient facts for facial plausibility	TransAmerica contends the complaint fails to allege it ever received or controlled the premium funds; only Agentra is alleged to have withdrawn payments	Dismissed (with leave to amend): Court finds Sutton's complaint does not plausibly allege conversion by TransAmerica, but grants plaintiff 14 days to amend

Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (requirement for factual allegations to raise right to relief above speculative level)
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (complaint must allow reasonable inference of liability)
Brokaw v. Mercer Cnty., 235 F.3d 1000 (standard for reviewing factual allegations on Rule 12(b)(6) motion)
Pirelli Armstrong Tire Corp. Retiree Med. Benefits Trust v. Walgreen Co., 631 F.3d 436 (cannot amend complaint through arguments in briefing)