Boyd v. ERMC, II, LP et al

Filing 43

OPINION AND ORDER: It is the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the court that this case in all remaining respects is remanded to the Circuit Court of Montgomery County, Alabama. It is further ORDERED that defendant ERMC, II, LP's 29 Motion for Su mmary Judgment on the state-law claims and 33 Motion to Supplement are left for resolution by the state court after remand. The clerk of the court is DIRECTED to take appropriate steps to effect the remand. This case is closed in this court. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 3/11/2015. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Appeals Checklist) Copy mailed to Circuit Court of Montgomery County, Alabama as directed.(dmn, )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION
MARTINE D. BOYD,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
v.
ERMC, II, LP, a foreign
limited partnership,
Defendant.

CIVIL ACTION NO.
2:14cv591-MHT
(WO)

OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Martine D. Boyd charged defendant ERMC,
II, LP, with sexual harassment under Title VII of the
Civil

Rights

Act

of

1964,

as

amended

(42

U.S.C.

§§ 1981a & 2000e through 2000e-17), and negligence and
wantonness

under

Alabama

state

law.

The

court

has

original jurisdiction over her federal claims under 28
U.S.C.

§§ 1331

(federal

question)

and

1343

(civil

rights), and 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(3) (Title VII).
The

court

has

supplemental

jurisdiction

state-law claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1367.

over

her

This action

originated in state court and was removed to federal
court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441.
Because

the

court

has

already

granted

summary

judgment in favor of ERMC and, thus, because Boyd no
longer has a viable federal claim, the court declines
to

exercise

supplemental

jurisdiction

to

reach

the

merits of Boyd’s state-law claims.
A

district

court

has

discretion

to

decline

supplemental jurisdiction over a claim when it “has
dismissed

all

jurisdiction.”
taken

into

economy,

over

which

it

has

28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3).

account

include

convenience,

Carnegie-Mellon
(1988).*1

claims

Univ.

v.

“the

Factors to be

values

of

fairness,

and

Cohill,

U.S.

484

original

judicial
comity.”
343,

350

Courts are strongly encouraged to dismiss

* Carnegie–Mellon was decided before the passage in
1990 of 28 U.S.C. § 1367, which expressly authorized
district courts to decline exercise of supplemental
jurisdiction over state-law claims if all claims within
the court’s original jurisdiction had been dismissed.
Nevertheless,
Carnegie–Mellon
remains
useful
in
analyzing when district courts should decline to
exercise supplementary jurisdiction.
2

state claims when the federal claims have been resolved
prior

to

trial.

See

id.

(concluding

that

“federal

court[s] should decline the exercise of [supplemental]
jurisdiction by dismissing the case without prejudice”
when the federal law claims have been dismissed prior
to trial).

See also Missildine v. Community Action

Committee,

2011

(Thompson,

J.).

courts

removal

in

WL

350517,

However,
cases

dismiss,

state

claims

exercise

supplemental

at

*3

because
must

over

(M.D.

“federal

remand,

which

jurisdiction,”

Ala.

district

rather

they
the

decline
court

remand Boyd’s state claims to state court.
Central Fla.

2011)

than
to
will

Myers v.

Investments, Inc., 592 F.3d 1201, 1226

(11th Cir. 2010); see also Cook v. Sheriff of Monroe
County, 402 F.3d 1092, 1123 (11th Cir. 2005).
***
Accordingly, it is the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE
of the court that this case in all remaining respects
is remanded to the Circuit Court of Montgomery County,
Alabama.
3

It is further ORDERED that defendant ERMC, II, LP’s
motion

for

summary

judgment

(doc.

no.

29)

on

the

state-law claims and motion to suppplement (doc. no.
33) are left for resolution by the state court after
remand.
The

clerk

of

the

court

is

DIRECTED

to

appropriate steps to effect the remand.
This case is closed in this court.
DONE, this the 11th day of March, 2015.
_/s/ Myron H. Thompson
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

take