Denton v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation et al

Filing 1583

ORDER OF REMAND: Case remanded to Madison County, Illinois. Signed by Judge Staci M. Yandle on 4/21/15. (ajr)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
BILLIE DENTON, Individually and as Special
Administrator for the Estate of ROBERT F.
DENTON, Deceased,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 13-cv-1243-SMY-DGW

vs.
AIR & LIQUID SYSTEMS
CORPORATIONS, et al.,
Defendants.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s Renewed Motion for Remand (Doc.
1548) to which no defendant has responded. For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS the
motion.
Plaintiff filed this case in the Third Judicial Circuit, Madison County, Illinois on October
7, 2013. On December 2, 2013, defendant Crane Co. removed (Doc. 3) the case based upon
federal officer jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1). On March 19, 2015 the Court
dismissed defendant Crane Co. (Doc. 1553). Based upon Crane Co.’s dismissal, Plaintiff now
seeks to remand the case back to state court.
Elimination of the defendant justifying removal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1) “does
not oust the district court of jurisdiction.” IMFC Prof’l Servs. of Fla., Inc. v. Latin Am. Home
Health, Inc., 676 F.2d 152, 159 (5th Cir. 1982); see also Oyler v. Nat’l Guard Ass’n of the
United States, 743 F.2d 545 (7th Cir. 1984). However, “1442(a)(1), through its creation of an
ancillary jurisdiction, confers discretion on the district court to decline to exercise continued
jurisdiction over [the non-federal defendants’] claims once [the defendant justifying jurisdiction]

dropped out of the case.” Id. Whether the ancillary claims must be remanded “depends on
considerations of comity, federalism judicial economy, and fairness to litigants.” Futch v. AIG,
Inc., 07-cv-402-GPM, 2007 WL 1752200, at *4 (S.D. Ill. Jun. 15, 2007) (citing 14C Wright,
Miller, Cooper & Steinman, Federal Practice & Procedure § 3727). “Once this discretion to
decline jurisdiction is exercised, the proper procedure is to remand the case under § 1447(c), for
at this point the case becomes one ‘removed improvidently and without jurisdiction.’” IMFC
Prof’l Servs., 676 F.2d at 159.
Here, defendant Crane Co, the only basis for federal jurisdiction, has been dismissed
from this case. The claims in this case are governed by state law. Further, Plaintiff’s choice of
forum is state court, and Defendants have expressed no objection to that forum. Based on the
foregoing facts, the Court declines to exercise jurisdiction over this case.
For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s Renewed Motion for Remand
(Doc. 1548) and REMANDS this case to the Third Judicial Circuit, Madison County, Illinois.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: April 21, 2015
s/ Staci M. Yandle
STACI M. YANDLE
DISTRICT JUDGE

2