Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 00-0627-P-S
August 24, 2000
RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE
This cause is before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion to Remand State Law Worker's Compensation Claim (Doc. 15), and Defendants' Response to Plaintiffs Motion to Remand (Doc. 19). Upon consideration of all matters presented, and for the reasons set forth herein, the undersigned Magistrate Judge recommends that Plaintiffs Motion to Remand State Law Worker's Compensation Claim be GRANTED.
On June 6, 2000, Plaintiff originally filed his three count complaint in the Circuit Court of Mobile County, Alabama. On July 10, 2000, this case was removed from the Mobile County Circuit Court to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama by Defendants asserting that this Court has federal question jurisdiction over the matters in this case pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1331. The basis for Defendants' assertion of federal question jurisdiction is that Counts Two and Three of Plaintiffs complaint fall under the Employee Retirement Income System Act ("ERISA"). Defendants also assert that this Court has pendant jurisdiction over Count One, which sets forth a claim for worker's compensation benefits pursuant to the State of Alabama Worker's Compensation Act.
On August 4, 2000, Plaintiff filed a motion to remand the state law worker's compensation claim (Count One) on the grounds that Defendants' removal was not proper and that this Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over this claim. On August 22, 2000, Defendants filed their Response to Plaintiffs Motion to Remand. In its response, Defendants state that they have no objection to Plaintiffs motion and that they consent to the remand of Count One.
In this case, the Court has original jurisdiction over Plaintiffs ERISA claims (Counts Two and Three) because they arose under federal law. See 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Federal courts can exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims that form part of the same case or controversy as the claims with original jurisdiction. Reed v. Heil Company, 206 F.3d 1055, 1058 (11th Cir. 2000) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a); 28 U.S.C. § 1441(c)). There are a few actions, however, that cannot be removed from state to federal court.Reed, 206 F.3d at 1058. Specifically, 28 U.S.C. § 1445(c) provides that "a civil action in any State court arising under the worker's compensation laws of such State may not be removed to any district court of the United States." 28 U.S.C. § 1445(c) (emphasis added). A claim for benefits under the Alabama worker's compensation laws is not subject to removal to federal district court. See Reed, 206 F.3d 1055. As such, Defendants' removal of Plaintiffs claim for worker's compensation benefits pursuant to the State of Alabama Worker's Compensation Act (Count One) was not proper. This Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to entertain Plaintiffs worker's compensation claim, and the claim must be remanded to state court.
Accordingly, it is the recommendation of the undersigned Magistrate Judge that Plaintiffs Motion to Remand State Law Worker's Compensation Claim be GRANTED and that Plaintiffs worker's compensation claim (Count One) be REMANDED to the Circuit Court of Mobile County.
The attached sheet contains important information regarding objections to this recommendation.