Leuthold v. Equifax Information Service LLC et al
Memorandum of Opinion and Order For the reasons set forth herein, the Court, in its discretion, declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state law claim and counterclaim. These state law claims, therefore, are dismissed without prejudice. Accordingly, it is appropriate for the Court to remand the case to the Crawford County, Ohio Municipal Court. A separate Order of Remand will issue. Judge Benita Y. Pearson on 11/15/2017. (JLG)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICE
LLC, et al.,
CASE NO. 1:17CV2072
JUDGE BENITA Y. PEARSON
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
On October 3, 2017, Defendant Equifax Information Service, LLC removed this action
from the Crawford County, Ohio Municipal Court. ECF No. 1. Since that date, Equifax
Information Service LLC along with another Defendant, Debt Recovery Solutions of Ohio, have
settled their disputes with Plaintiff Jennifer Leuthold. See ECF Nos. 14 and 17. This has left one
Defendant: Halls Plumbing, Heating, and Air Conditioning, Inc. Two claims remain, both of
which are state law claims: (1) a claim against Halls Plumbing, Heating, and Air Conditioning,
Inc. for libel and (2) a counterclaim against Plaintiff for breach of contract. For the reasons that
follow, the Court remands the case to the Crawford County Municipal Court.
When considering whether to exercise supplemental, or pendent, jurisdiction over state
law claims, the Court
should consider the interests of judicial economy and the avoidance of multiplicity
of litigation and balance those interests against needlessly deciding state law
issues. The court also may consider whether the plaintiff has used manipulative
tactics to defeat removal and secure a state forum, such as simply by deleting all
federal-law claims from the complaint and requesting that the district court
remand the case.
Harper v. AutoAlliance Int’l, Inc., 392 F.3d 195, 211 (6th Cir. 2004) (internal quotation marks
and citations omitted); see also Gamel v. City of Cincinnati, 625 F.3d 949, 952 (6th Cir. 2010).
(“When all federal claims are dismissed before trial, the balance of considerations usually will
point to dismissing the state law claims, or remanding them to state court if the action was
removed.”) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
The Court finds that, balancing the interests described above, needlessly deciding state
law issues weighs most heavily against the exercise of jurisdiction. Plaintiff’s complaint (ECF
No. 1-2) alleges one state law claim against Defendant, and Defendant’s counterclaim (ECF No.
4-1) alleges one state law claim. The Court finds that Crawford County Municipal Court can
capably adjudicate both of these claims. As this case is in its early stages, the exercise of
supplemental jurisdiction is not necessary to avoid the multiplicity of litigation. The Court does
not discern any manipulative tactics on Plaintiff’s part to defeat jurisdiction.
Therefore, the Court, in its discretion, declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over
the remaining state law claim and counterclaim. These state law claims, therefore, are dismissed
without prejudice. See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3) (“The district court may decline to exercise
supplemental jurisdiction over a claim . . . [if it] has dismissed all claims over which it has
original jurisdiction.”); Holson v. Good, 579 F.App’x 363 (6th Cir. 2014) (holding that it is
within district court’s discretion to remand state law claims after all it has dismissed all federal
law claims). Accordingly, it is appropriate for the Court to remand the case to the Crawford
County, Ohio Municipal Court.
A separate Order of Remand will issue.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
November 15, 2017
/s/ Benita Y. Pearson
Benita Y. Pearson
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?