Miller v. PPG Industries, Inc.
District Court, W.D. Kentucky
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
HEYBURN, Chief Judge.
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs Renewed Motion to Remand. The Court has carefully considered the arguments and evidence. For the reasons discussed below, the Court will grant Plaintiffs Renewed Motion and remand this action to state court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
I
Plaintiff initially filed this action in Kentucky state court against his employer PPG alleging that after he became disabled and could no longer work PPG failed to make certain contractual payments. PPG removed to federal court on the basis of ERISA preemption.…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Massachusetts v. MorashSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- McMahon v. Digital Equipment Corp.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1998
- Robert Stern v. International Business Machines (IBM), a New York CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2003
- Alaska Airlines, Inc. v. Oregon Bureau of LaborCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1997
- Miller v. PPG Industries, Inc.District Court, W.D. Kentucky · 2002
3Cited by4 opinions
- Langley v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2007
- Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad v. SchiefferDistrict Court, D. South Dakota · 2012
- Arora v. Hartford Life and Annuity Ins. Co.District Court, N.D. California · 2007
- Langley v. DaimlerChryslerCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2007