Filed November 13, 2007
Addressing this question, courts have stressed that the DJA “should be liberally construed to accomplish its intended purpose of affording a speedy and inexpensive method of adjudicating legal disputes . . . and to settle legal rights and remove uncertainty and insecurity from legal relationships . . . .” Beacon Constr. Co. v. Matco Elec. Co., 521 F.2d 392, 397 (2d Cir. 1975); see also Allstate Ins. Co. v. Emp. Liab. Assur. Co., 445 F.2d 1278, 1280 (5th Cir. 1971) (“[DJA] is to be liberally construed to achieve its . . . salutary purpose.”) The Supreme Court has recently reaffirmed that the actual controversy requirement is satisfied if the dispute is “definite and concrete, touching the legal relations of parties having adverse interests” and “real and substantial” such that it will permit “specific relief through a decree of a conclusive character.”