Legal Opinion
Brawn v. Coleman
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided August 30, 2001No. 1:01-cv-10220PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
SARIS, District Judge.
Defendants, a union local and its business agent, have removed a state-court action for libel, tortious interference with advantageous business relationship, and intentional infliction of emotional harm pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441. Plaintiffs have moved for remand arguing that there is no basis in the complaint for asserting federal question jurisdiction.
For the reasons stated below, Plaintiffs’ motion to remand is ALLOWED.
I. BACKGROUND
Unless otherwise noted, the following facts are drawn from the complaint. 1
Plaintiff Barbara Brawn (“Brawn”), a…
2Cases cited36 opinions
- United Mine Workers of America v. GibbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Caterpillar Inc. v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Vaca v. SipesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Retail Property Trust v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
- Cardillo v. CardilloDistrict Court, D. Rhode Island · 2005
- Giannetti v. MahoneyDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2002
- Hutchins v. Cardiac Science, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2006
- Law v. International Union of Operating Engineers Local No. 37District Court, D. Maryland · 2002
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.