Dorfman v. MGP Ingredients, Inc. et al
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 34 Motion to Dismiss. The court dismisses plaintiff's state law claims without prejudice. Signed by District Judge Daniel D. Crabtree on 1/11/2022. (heo)
Case 2:20-cv-02239-DDC-JPO Document 36 Filed 01/11/22 Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
MITCHELL DORFMAN, derivatively
and on behalf of MGP INGREDIENTS,
Case No. 20-2239-DDC-JPO
AUGUSTUS C. GRIFFIN, et al.,
MGP INGREDIENTS, INC.,
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter comes before the court on the parties’ Joint Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 34). On
March 31, 2021, the court entered an Order (Doc. 30) granting defendants’ Motion to Dismiss in
part and denying the motion in part. Specifically, the court granted the Motion to Dismiss
plaintiff’s federal claims without prejudice. Doc. 30 at 47–49. But, the court denied the motion
as it applied to plaintiff’s state law claims. And, the court stayed the case pending the Kansas
Supreme Court’s review of Herington v. City of Wichita, 479 P.3d 482 (Kan. Ct. App. 2020).
On December 17, 2021, the Kansas Supreme Court issued a decision in Herington. See
Herington v. City of Wichita, __ P.3d __, 2021 WL 5990322 (Kan. Dec. 17, 2021). It held that
when “a federal court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims and
dismisses those claims without prejudice,” that dismissal is not a “final judgment on those state
Case 2:20-cv-02239-DDC-JPO Document 36 Filed 01/11/22 Page 2 of 2
law claims” and “the Kansas common law doctrine of res judicata does not preclude a litigant
from bringing those claims in state court.” Id. at *10.
Consistent with the Kansas Supreme Court’s decision in Herington, the parties agree: the
court should dismiss plaintiff’s “remaining, state claims, without prejudice to their refiling in
state court, and with each party to bear its own costs.” Doc. 34 at 2. The court grants the
parties’ request. Thus, the court dismisses plaintiff’s state law claims without prejudice. And,
the court directs the Clerk of the Court to enter Judgment consistent with this Order and the
court’s March 31, 2021 Order (Doc. 30). That is, the court directs the Clerk of the Court to enter
Judgment (1) dismissing plaintiff’s federal claims without prejudice consistent with the court’s
March 31, 2021 Order (Doc. 30), and (2) dismissing plaintiff’s state law claims without
prejudice because the court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law
claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED BY THE COURT THAT the parties’ Joint Motion
to Dismiss (Doc. 34) is granted. The court dismisses plaintiff’s state law claims without
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated this 11th day of January, 2022, at Kansas City, Kansas.
s/ Daniel D. Crabtree
Daniel D. Crabtree
United States District Judge
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?