VI. REMAINING STATE LAW CLAIMS
Plaintiffs' remaining claims are state law causes of action alleged to be within the court's supplemental jurisdiction. See Complaint, Counts III, V - XVII.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1367, a district court "may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over a claim . . . if . . . the district court has dismissed all claims over which it has original jurisdiction." In addition, the Third circuit has stated that where a party's federal claims are disposed of on a summary judgment motion, the court should generally refrain from exercising supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state claims. See Tully v. Mott Supermarkets, Inc., 540 F.2d 187, 195-96 (3rd Cir. 1976); see also Foster V. Township of Hillside, 780 F. Supp. 1026, 1047 (D.N.J. 1992).
Accordingly, this court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state claims.
The court is disposing of all claims in this case in the following manner:
1) Summary judgment is granted for defendants on all claims against the State of New Jersey, state agencies, and state officials in their official capacities,
based on the Eleventh Amendment;
2) Summary judgment is granted for defendants on all remaining claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on the basis of absolute and qualified immunity;
3) Plaintiffs' federal RICO claim is dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6);
4) The court declines to exercise its supplemental jurisdiction over all remaining state law claims and is therefore dismissing them.
The court will enter an appropriate order.
JOSEPH E. IRENAS
Dated: October 23, 1992.