Nissan v. Hecker

Full title: ALMA NISSAN, Plaintiff, v. LAURENCE A. HECKER, Defendant

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

Date published: Mar 23, 2006

Case No. 06-11018 (E.D. Mich. Mar. 23, 2006)

Opinion

Case No. 06-11018.

March 23, 2006

ORDER DISMISSING PLAINTIFF'S STATE LAW CLAIMS

LAWRENCE ZATKOFF, District Judge

Plaintiff filed her Complaint on March 9, 2006. Plaintiff's Complaint contains the following three counts:

Count I Violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act;

Count II Violation of the Michigan Debt Collection Practices Act; and

Count III Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress.

See Complaint.

The Court has subject matter jurisdiction over Count I, because it arises under federal law. See 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Counts II and III, however, are based upon state law. Although the Court has supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a), the Court may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction if there are "compelling reasons for declining jurisdiction." See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(4). The Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff's state law claims in this matter. The Court finds that the contemporaneous presentation of Plaintiff's parallel state claims for relief will result in the undue confusion of the jury. See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(4); see also Padilla v. City of Saginaw, 867 F. Supp. 1309, 1315 (E.D. Mich. 1994).

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's state law claims of Violation of the Michigan Debt Collection Practices Act (Count II) and Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (Count III) are hereby DISMISSED without prejudice. The Court retains jurisdiction over Plaintiff's federal claim (Count I).

IT IS SO ORDERED.