Smith v. ConAgra Frozen Foods Inc et al
Filing
56
ORDER re 54 Certification of Issue to State Court. The Court thinks Smith's retaliation claim against Steen is not barred by limitations. Steen's presence in the case destroys complete diversity. Remand appears to be appropriate. If any party disagrees, the party should file an objection by December 27, 2013. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 12/13/13. (kpr)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
WESTERN DIVISION
PLAINTIFF
TANYA SMITH
No. 4:12-cv-517-DPM
v.
CONAGRA FOODS, INC. and
TERRY STEEN
DEFENDANTS
ORDER
The Court notes the Arkansas Supreme Court's recent opinion
answering the certified question. The Court will await the appellate court's
mandate, but has reviewed the parties' pre-certification filings in preparation
for acting. Here is the Court's thinking. Smith's retaliation claim against
Steen is not barred by limitations. Steen's presence in the case destroys
complete diversity.
Remand appears to be appropriate.
If any party
disagrees, the party should file an objection by 27 December 2013.
So Ordered.
D.P. Marshall if''
United States District Judge
I 3 /.D!t&z~ o?.O I.?
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?