From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

PEARSON v. UAW INTERNATIONAL UNION

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
Jul 11, 2001
CASE NO. 00-CV-74765-DT, 01-CV-71222-DT (E.D. Mich. Jul. 11, 2001)

Opinion

CASE NO. 00-CV-74765-DT, 01-CV-71222-DT

July 11, 2001


OPINION AND ORDER


AT A SESSION of said Court, held in the United States Courthouse, in the City of Detroit, State of Michigan, on PRESENT: THE HONORABLE LAWRENCE P. ZATROFF CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

This matter is before the Court on Defendants' Motion for Reconsideration. Plaintiff has responded. For the reasons set forth below, Defendants' Motion for Reconsideration is GRANTED.

Pursuant to E.D. Mich. LR 7.1(g)(2), Defendants' reply brief, filed on July 10, 2001, is HEREBY STRICKEN.

On May 21, 2001, this Court ruled that Plaintiff's breach of labor contract claim under Section 301 of the Labor-Management Relations Act (Count I) preempted Plaintiffs state law claims of fraud and intentional misrepresentation (Count IV) and intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count V). Therefore, all three claims were properly before this Court.

On June 14, 2001, this Court issued an opinion and order granting Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment and holding that Plaintiff's breach of labor contract claim under § 301 was barred by the doctrine of res judicata. In so ruling, the Court remanded the preempted state law claims of fraud and intentional misrepresentation (Count IV) and intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count V) to Wayne County Circuit Court.

Upon review of the relevant law regarding preemption, the Court finds that Plaintiff's preempted state law claims of fraud and intentional infliction of emotional distress should be properly dismissed in accord with this Court's June 14, 2001 order dismissing Plaintiff's federal labor claim. See, e.g., Beard v. Carrollton R.R., 893 F.2d 117 (6th Cir. 1989) (holding that the district court should have dismissed, not remanded, preempted state claims after dismissing plaintiffs federal claim).

Accordingly, for the reasons stated above, Defendants' Motion for Reconsideration is GRANTED, Plaintiff's state law claims of fraud and intentional misrepresentation (Count IV) and intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count V) are DISMISSED, and the Court's previous order remanding the preempted state claims is VACATED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

JUDGMENT

IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that pursuant to this Court's Opinion and Order dated Plaintiff's preempted state law claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.


Summaries of

PEARSON v. UAW INTERNATIONAL UNION

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
Jul 11, 2001
CASE NO. 00-CV-74765-DT, 01-CV-71222-DT (E.D. Mich. Jul. 11, 2001)
Case details for

PEARSON v. UAW INTERNATIONAL UNION

Case Details

Full title:RANDALL W. PEARSON, Plaintiff v. UAW INTERNATIONAL UNION, UAW LOCAL 140…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division

Date published: Jul 11, 2001

Citations

CASE NO. 00-CV-74765-DT, 01-CV-71222-DT (E.D. Mich. Jul. 11, 2001)