White v. Fitzpatrick et al

Filing 96

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER, granting 93 MOTION clarification with respect to the Order dismissing parts of the complaint with prejudice and parts without prejudice re 80 Memorandum & Order, filed by Coralynn E. White. Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 4/2/2018. (jdh)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
CORALYNN E. WHITE,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 3:17-cv-00087-JPG-RJD

JOSEPH JAMES FITZPATRICK, AMBER
FITZPATRICK, THOMAS WUEST, MARK
BERNDSEN, and CITY OF BREESE,
ILLINOIS,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on the plaintiff’s motion for clarification. (Doc. 93.)
The Court GRANTS the motion and clarifies its prior Memorandum & Order and Judgment
(Docs. 80, 81) as follows:
A district court has broad discretion under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a) in deciding whether to
decline jurisdiction over state law claims when no original jurisdiction claims remain pending. RWJ
Mgmt. Co. v. BP Prods. N. Am., Inc., 672 F.3d 476, 478 (7th Cir. 2012). In this case, the Court has
declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims—including Joseph
Fitzpatrick’s and Amber Fitzpatrick’s state law counterclaims as well as Counts IV, VI, VII, and IX
of the amended complaint. This case is closed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: APRIL 2, 2018
s/ J. Phil Gilbert
J. PHIL GILBERT
DISTRICT JUDGE