Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-almd-3_05-cv-00689/USCOURTS-almd-3_05-cv-00689-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

EASTERN DIVISION

MERY THOMAS, as next friend to )

minor child X, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CASE NO. 3:05CV689-W

) (WO) 

CITY OF VALLEY, ALA., et. al., )

)

Defendants. )

ORDER

On November 1, 2005, this court entered an Order (Doc. # 14), partially granting

Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 3) and Renewed Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 11) and

giving Plaintiff until November 10, 2005, to file an amended complaint more fully alleging

her equal protection claim. Plaintiff has failed to file an amended complaint. T he court

therefore finds that Plaintiff’s § 1983 claim is due to be dismissed with prejudice. 

Plaintiff’s complaint also alleges state law claims of negligence, outrage, breach of

implied contract, wantonness, mental anguish/mental distress, respondeat superior and

failure to provide services. The court has discretion as t o whet her or not to exercise

supplemental jurisdiction over these claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1367. The statute states, in

pertinent part: “The district courts may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdict ion over

a claim under subsection (a) if . . . the district court has dismissed all claims over which it

has original jurisdiction. . . .” 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3). Because Plaintiff's federal § 1983 claim

Case 3:05-cv-00689-SRW Document 15 Filed 11/16/05 Page 1 of 2
is due to be dismissed, in the interest of judicial economy, the court declines to exercise

supplemental discret ion over the state law claims. See Baggett v. First National Bank of

Gainesville, 117 F.3d 1342, 1353 (11th Cir. 1997) (“Where § 1367(c) applies, considerations

of judicial economy, convenience, fairness, and comity may influence the court ’s discretion

to exercise supplemental jurisdict ion”) (internal citations and quotations omitted).

Therefore, Plaintiff’s state law claims are due to be remanded to state court. 

For the foregoing reasons, it is 

ORDERED that plaintiff’s § 1983 claims are DISMISSED with prejudice.

It is further ORDERED that this action is REM ANDED to the Circuit Court of

Chambers County, Alabama.

DONE, this 16th day of November, 2005.

/s/ Susan Russ Walker 

SUSAN RUSS WALKER

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 3:05-cv-00689-SRW Document 15 Filed 11/16/05 Page 2 of 2