Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Mawhinney v. Bennett

November 22, 2010

EDMUND K. MAWHINNEY AND MICHAEL V. FRANCESCO, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
KEVIN A. BENNETT, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hillman, District Judge

MEMORANDUM & ORDER

THIS MATTER having come before the Court upon a letter, dated September 27, 2010, by Plaintiffs, Edmund K. Mawhinney and Michael V. Francesco, requesting that the Court remand this case to New Jersey state court, and upon the Court's own initiative to determine, sua sponte, the propriety of exercising supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims;*fn1 and

Plaintiffs having originally commenced this suit against Defendants in July 2008; and

The Court's subject matter jurisdiction over this case having been predicated upon federal question jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331; and

The Court having dismissed most of Plaintiffs' federal claims as part of its Opinion and Order issued on January 11, 2010; and

Plaintiffs stating, in a letter dated June 23, 2010, that they voluntarily withdraw their sole, remaining federal cause of action against defendant, Domenic Cappella, and thus will not prosecute it; and

It appearing that no parties dispute or contest Plaintiffs' withdrawal of that amorphous federal claim; and

It appearing that the only basis for this Court's continuing jurisdiction over Plaintiffs' remaining state law claims against defendants, Cappella and the Atlantic City Vulcans, being supplemental jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367; and

Cappella having moved to dismiss Plaintiffs' complaint on or around August 17, 2010; and

The Atlantic City Vulcans having moved to dismiss Plaintiffs' complaint on or around November 1, 2010; and

Plaintiffs arguing that the Court should no longer exercise supplemental jurisdiction over its pendent state law claims, and should remand the matter to New Jersey state court, because no federal questions remain in this case and the Court should not needlessly decide issues of state law; and

Cappella, in a letter also dated September 27, 2010, arguing that the Court should continue to exercise supplemental jurisdiction, and should decide its pending motion to dismiss, because the grounds for Cappella's motion to dismiss mirror the same reasons why the Court already dismissed Plaintiffs' claims against defendant, Kevin A. Bennett,*fn2 and were the Court to ignore Cappella's motion, it would invite a state court to reach a different, inconsistent result than that reached by this Court in its earlier decision; and

The Court noting that "[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,'" Oras v. City of Jersey City, 328 F. App'x 772, 775 (3d Cir. 2009) (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3)); and

The Court further noting that "'where the claim over which the district court has original jurisdiction is dismissed before trial, the district court must decline to decide the pendent state claims unless considerations of judicial economy, convenience, and fairness to the parties provide an affirmative justification ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.