Brooks v. Branch Banking & Trust Company et al

Filing 21

ORDER granting 17 Motion to Remand. Signed by Chief Judge James C. Dever III on 12/30/2016. (Briggeman, N.)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
WESTERN DIVISION
No. 5:16-CV-839-D

JONI KING BROOKS,
Plaintiff,

)
)
)
)

)

~

BRANCH BANKING & TRUST
COMPANY, TAMMY CAPORALE,
and MICHAEL PARRILL,
Defendants.

ORDER

)
)
)
)
)
)

On August 12,2016, Joni King Brooks ("plaintiff'' or "Brooks") sued her former employer
Branch Banking & Trust Company ("BB&T") and two former BB&T supervisors Tammy Caporale
and Michael Parrill (collectively "defendants") in Vance County Superior Court. See Compl. [D.E.
1-1]. Brooks alleges wrongful discharge in violation ofNorth Carolina public policy based on her
age and intentional infliction of emotional distress. See id. ,, 5-20, 23-29. Oddly, Brooks's
complaint does not contain a claim under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, as
amended, 29 U.S.C. §§ 621 to 634 ("ADEA"), but does seek liquidated damages and attorney's fees
under 29 U.S.C. § 626(b). See Compl. ,, 21-22. On October 7, 2016, defendants removed the
action and alleged federal question jurisdiction under 28 U .S.C. § 1331 concerning Brooks's alleged
ADEA claim and supplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a) concerning Brooks's alleged
state-law claims. See [D.E. 1] ,, 5-8.
On October 14, 2016, defendants moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim
upon which relief can be granted [D.E. 9] and filed a memorandum in support [D.E. 10]. See Fed.

R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). On November 16,2016, Brooks responded in opposition [D.E. 16] and moved
to remand the action to Vance County Superior Court [D.E. 17]. In support of Brooks's motion to
remand, Brooks states that her complaint does not include an ADEA claim. See [D.E. 17] 1-2.
Defendants did not respond to the motion to remand.
The court has reviewed Brooks's complaint, the briefs, and the governing law.

See,~'

Hoscherv.AppalachianPowerCo., 739F.3d 163, 169 (4thCir. 2014); Dixon v. Coburg Dairy. Inc.,
369 F.3d 811, 816 (4th Cir. 2004) (per curiam); Mulcaheyv. Columbia Organic Chems. Co., 29 F.3d
148, 151-54 (4th Cir. 1994). The court lacks federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331
because there is no federal question in this case. Brooks's complaint does not contain an ADEA
claim. Likewise, this court lacks diversity jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1), (c)(1); cf.
Compl. ,, 2-2B. Thus, the court grants Brooks's motion to remand the action to Vance County
Superior Court.

In sum, the court GRANTS plaintiff's motion to remand [D.E. 17] and REMANDS the
action to Vance County Superior Court.
SO ORDERED. This JO. day of December 2016.

Chief United States District Judge

2