Christopher Lawrence v. University Hospital, et al.

Whether the decision of the 11th Circuit violates Petitioners Chaslie Lawrence and Petrice Ricks rights as beneficiaries to allow and select enjoining siblings as claimant’s and part of real parties’ litigants in a negligence civil action under the interpleader statute; and if so, and because no medical malpractice and wrongful death claims was named, Did the Lower Court usage of Georgia State law was in error abridging Petitioners’ right to full access and jurisdiction of the Court?

The Supreme Court is asked to review minimal diversity of having at least one party to the suit citizenship and domicile different from one party to the citizenry and domicile under the new standards of constitutionality as oppose to the statutory deter­ minants; if so, can enjoined parties to a federal lawsuit have the same entitlements of recognition as a party to the suit? If both conditions are relevant and the parties never apply a state law or tort claim, are the enjoined parties considered real persons having an interest in the lawsuit and claims?

Did the 11th Circuit err when they excluded the domicile and citizenry of diverse litigants Gwen Lawrence, Gregory Lawrence, Charlie Lawrence Jr. and Petrice Ricks as enjoined litigants under the Interpleader statute permissibility pursuant to Judicial Code § 41 (26)(a)(i)(a), Article III, § 2. U.S.A Constitution.