From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Green v. City of East Chicago

United States District Court, N.D. Indiana, Hammond Division
Mar 24, 2009
CAUSE NO.: 2:08-CV-336-JVB (N.D. Ind. Mar. 24, 2009)

Opinion

CAUSE NO.: 2:08-CV-336-JVB.

March 24, 2009


OPINION AND ORDER


The Plaintiffs, Harlan Green, Keonta Green, Clarence Green, and Cenita Green, have sued the Defendants, the City of East Chicago, East Chicago Parks Recreation, and Loretta Mosley, for common law negligence in training, supervising, and hiring camp employees; for strip searching the children at a parks and recreation program; and for violating of the Plaintiffs' civil rights under Indiana and federal law. The Defendants removed the case from the Superior Court of Lake County, Indiana, to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division. The Plaintiffs moved to remand the case to state court, arguing that the state claims contained in the Complaint predominate the federal claims over which the Court has original jurisdiction. 28 U.S.C. § 1367; 28 U.S.C. § 1441. Defendants oppose remanding the state law claims and contend that the state and federal claims derive from a common nucleus of operative fact.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiffs Harlan, Keonta, and Clarence attended a summer program in July 2007, funded by the Defendants, at the Martin Luther King Center in East Chicago. Plaintiffs allege that, while at the camp, Harlan, Keonta, and Clarence were illegally strip searched under the direction of Defendant Loretta Mosley, who was a camp counselor.

DISCUSSION

Federal district courts have original jurisdiction over civil claims arising under federal law, including federal civil rights statutes. 28 U.S.C. § 1331. "Federal district courts have supplemental jurisdiction over all other claims that are so related to claims in the action within original jurisdiction that they form part of the same case or controversy." 28 U.S.C. § 1367. Whether a claim is part of the same case or controversy as the claim within the court's original jurisdiction is determined according to the standard for exercising supplemental jurisdiction set forth in United Mine Workers v. Gibbs, 383 U.S. 715 (1966). The standard indicates that federal courts have supplemental "jurisdiction over state law claims that `derive from a common nucleus of operative fact,' such that `the relationship between [the federal] claim and the state claim permits the conclusion that the entire action before the court comprises but one constitutional case.'" Groce v. Eli Lily, 193 F.3d 496, 500 (7th Cir. 1999) (quoting Gibbs, 383 U.S. at 725).

The alleged strip search triggered the plaintiffs' federal civil rights claims. This court has original jurisdiction over the federal claims. 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Plaintiffs allege that the strip search happened because the Defendants were negligent in their hiring, training, and supervision of camp employees. Thus, the whole case, including the state claims, is based upon the strip search and the Plaintiffs' federal and state claims derive from a "common nucleus of operative fact." 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a). Since the state law claims arise out of the same set of facts as their federal claim, this Court has jurisdiction over the whole case.

For these reasons, the Plaintiffs' Motion to Remand is DENIED.

SO ORDERED


Summaries of

Green v. City of East Chicago

United States District Court, N.D. Indiana, Hammond Division
Mar 24, 2009
CAUSE NO.: 2:08-CV-336-JVB (N.D. Ind. Mar. 24, 2009)
Case details for

Green v. City of East Chicago

Case Details

Full title:HARLAN GREEN b/n/f CENITA GREEN, KEONTA GREEN b/n/f CENITA GREEN, CLARENCE…

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Indiana, Hammond Division

Date published: Mar 24, 2009

Citations

CAUSE NO.: 2:08-CV-336-JVB (N.D. Ind. Mar. 24, 2009)