Murray v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation et al

Filing 265

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER -...IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff Sheree Murray's motion to remand is GRANTED. [Doc. 224] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case is REMANDED to the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, State of Missouri. An appropriate order of remand will accompany this memorandum and order. Signed by District Judge Charles A. Shaw on 5/19/2016. (MRC)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION

SHEREE MURRAY, Individually and as
Personal Representative of the Estate of
LEROY MURRAY, Deceased,
Plaintiff,
v.
AIR & LIQUID SYSTEMS
CORPORATION, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 4:14-CV-1638 CAS

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The matter is before the Court plaintiff Sheree Murray’s motion to remand. None of the
defendants in this case filed a response in opposition to the motion, and the time to do so has
expired. For the following reasons, plaintiff’s motion to remand will be granted.
Discussion
On July 30, 2014, plaintiff Sheree Murray filed suit in Missouri state court, individually and
as the personal representative of the estate of Leroy Murray, against 29 corporate defendants.
Plaintiff alleges that her husband, Leroy Murray, was exposed to asbestos that was manufactured,
sold, or distributed by the defendants, and as a result of the exposure, he developed lung cancer and
died. Plaintiff asserts only state law claims against the defendants. On September 22, 2014,
defendant Crane Co. removed this cause of action to federal court based on federal officer
jurisdiction, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1442(a)(1) and 1446. Crane Co. asserts in its Notice of
Removal that the case is subject to federal officer jurisdiction because Leroy Murray’s exposure to
any Crane Co. product happened while he was in the United States Navy, and any Crane Co. product
that was supplied to the Navy was manufactured in strict accordance with Navy specifications and

requirements. Defendants Warren Pumps, LLC and CBS Corporation joined in the removal and also
asserted federal officer jurisdiction. No other defendant joined in the notice of removal or asserted
any other ground for federal jurisdiction. Defendants Crane Co., Warren Pumps, LLC, and CBS
Corporation have since been dismissed from this suit, and plaintiff now moves to remand to state
court.
In cases removed under § 1442(a)(1), “[i]f the federal party is eliminated from the suit after
removal . . . the district court does not lose its . . . jurisdiction over the state law claims against the
remaining non-federal parties.” District of Columbia v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 762 F.2d 129, 132–33
(D.C. Cir. 1985). “Instead, the district court retains the power either to adjudicate the underlying
state law claims or to remand the case to state court.” Id. at 133. See also Spencer v. New Orleans
Levee Bd., 737 F.2d 435, 438 (5th Cir. 1984); Watkins v. Grover, 508 F.2d 920, 921 (9th Cir. 1975).
In the absence of compelling reasons to retain jurisdiction, district courts in their discretion may
remand to state court. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 762 F.2d at 133; see also 16 James Wm. Moore, et al.,
Moore’s Federal Practice § 107.15[1][b] (3d ed. 2014). Here, plaintiff moved to remand and no
defendant objected or offered reasons as to why this Court should retain jurisdiction. Seeing no
compelling reasons to retain jurisdiction, the Court in the exercise of its discretion will remand the
cause of action to state court. The pending motions can be addressed by the state court.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff Sheree Murray’s motion to remand is
GRANTED. [Doc. 224]
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case is REMANDED to the Circuit Court of the
City of St. Louis, State of Missouri.

2

An appropriate order of remand will accompany this memorandum and order.

___________________________________
CHARLES A. SHAW
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated this 19th day of May, 2016.

3