Opinion
Case No. 2:04-CV266 TS.
August 26, 2004
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO REMAND
This matter is before the court on Plaintiff's Motion to Remand This case was filed on March 8, 2004, in the Fifth Judicial District Court for Washington County, Utah. The Complaint included a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (second cause of action), 42 U.S.C. § 1988(b) (third cause of action), Substantive Due Process Violation (fourth cause of action), for Inverse Condemnation/Constitutional Taking (fifth cause of action), Private Attorney General (sixth cause of action), Defamation (seventh cause of action), Interference with Existing and Prospective Economic Relations (eighth cause of action), Fraudulent Misrepresentation (ninth cause of action), Negligent Misrepresentation (tenth cause of action), and Public Nuisance (eleventh cause of action).
On March 24, 2004, Defendants removed the case to this court. Although they acknowledge this court's subject matter jurisdiction over the federal law claims and its pendant jurisdiction over the state law claims, Plaintiffs move this court to exercise its discretion to remand on the basis that their state law claims substantially predominates over the federal law claims. 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(2).
[F]ederal courts' original jurisdiction over federal questions carries with it jurisdiction over state law claims that derive from a common nucleus of operative fact, . . . district courts are statutorily authorized to decline supplemental jurisdiction over a state law claim if
* * *
(2) the claim substantially predominates over the claim or claims over which the district court has original jurisdiction,Gold v. Local 7 United Food Commercial Workers Union, 159 F.3d 1307, 1310 (10th Cir. 1998), overruled on other grounds by Styskal v. Weld County Comm'rs., 365 F.3d 855 (10th Cir. 2004) (Quoting § 1367(c)(3)).
Having considered the Complaint and the parties' arguments, the court finds that the state law claims do not substantially predominate over the federal claims. It is therefore
ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion to Remand is DENIED.