Frank v. Town of West Yellowstone, Montana et al
ORDER denying as Moot 27 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting 34 Motion to Remand; denying as Moot 39 Motion for Summary Judgment. 1. Plaintiff's Motion to Remand the Wage Protection Claim to State Court is GRANTED. This case is remanded to the Montana Eighteenth Judicial District Court, Gallatin County. Signed by Judge Sam E Haddon on 2/24/2016. (ELL, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA
FEB 2 4 2016
Clerk, U.S. District Court
District Of Montana
No. CV 15-26-BU-SEH
TOWN OF WEST YELLOWSTONE,
MONTANA; COLE PARK.ER, in his
individual and official capacity; JOHN
COSTELLO, in his individual and
official capacity; GREG FORSYTHE,
in his individual and official capacity;
and BRAD SCHMIER, in his
individual and official capacity,
This case arises from the Amended Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial 1
of Plaintiff Aaron Frank ("Frank") filed in this Court on June 23, 2015.
On November 30, 2015, the Court held a hearing on Defendants' Motions to
Dismiss for which Defendants Cole Parker, John Costello, Greg Forsythe, and
Brad Schmier (the "Councilmen") and Defendant Town of West Yellowstone (the
See Doc. 4.
"Town") sought partial dismissal of Counts I, II, IV, V, VI, and IX against the
Town and dismissal of all counts against the Councilmen. 2 Upon the record made
in open court, the Court dismissed all claims against the Town's Councilmen in
their official and individual capacities. It also dismissed Counts I, II, III, IV, V,
VI, and IX. On January 13, 2016, the Court dismissed Frank's constructive
discharge claim under the Wrongful Discharge from Employment Act
("WDEA"). 3 The remaining claim against the Town is a state law claim that arises
under Mont. Code Ann. §§ 39-3-205 and 39-3-206. 4 On January 29, 2016, Frank
filed Plaintiffs Motion to Remand the Wage Protection Claim to State Court. 5
A district court has discretion in deciding whether to adjudicate state law
claims following the disposition of federal claims. 6 It is within a district court's
discretion to remand the state law claims to federal court. 7 Moreover, "a remand
may best promote the values of economy, convenience, fairness, and comity." 8
See Doc. 5.
See Doc. 26.
See Doc. 4 at 52-54.
See Doc. 34.
See Harrell v. 20th Century Ins. Co., 934 F.2d 203, 205 (9th Cir. 1991) (citing Nishimoto v. FedermanBachrach & Assoc., 903 F.2d 709, 712 (9th Cir. 1990)).
Carnegie-Mellon University v. Cohill, 484 U.S. 343, 353 (1988).
Here, all federal claims that established federal question jurisdiction have been
dismissed. 9 The only remaining is a claim that is based on state law.
Plaintiffs Motion to Remand the Wage Protection Claim to State
Court 10 is GRANTED. This case is remanded to the Montana Eighteenth Judicial
District Court, Gallatin County.
Defendant Town of West Yellowstone's Motion for Summary
Judgment 11 is DENIED as moot.
Plaintiff, Aaron Frank's Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment 12
is DENIED as moot.
~ 'f day of February, 2016
United States District Judge
See Docs. 19 and 26.
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?