From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brown v. Fedex Freight, Inc.

United States District Court, M.D. Tennessee, Nashville Division
May 17, 2010
NO. 3:10-0301 (M.D. Tenn. May. 17, 2010)

Opinion

NO. 3:10-0301.

May 17, 2010


MEMORANDUM


Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion for Remand (Docket No. 7). For the reasons stated herein, Plaintiff's Motion is GRANTED, and this action is remanded to the Circuit Court for Davidson County, Tennessee.

FACTS

Plaintiff filed this action in the Circuit Court for Davidson County, Tennessee, alleging that Defendant terminated his employment in retaliation for Plaintiff's worker's compensation claims. Plaintiff's Complaint alleges only state law claims. Plaintiff's Complaint states that Defendant Fedex Freight, Inc. is a foreign (Arkansas) corporation with principal offices at 2200 Forward Drive, Harrison, Arkansas. Docket No. 1-1, p. 1.

Defendant removed this action to this Court, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332 and 1441, alleging diversity of citizenship of the parties, based upon the Complaint, and an amount in controversy exceeding $75,000. Docket No. 1.

Now Plaintiff asserts that the action was improperly removed and argues that Defendant's principal office is not in Arkansas, but rather it is in Tennessee. Thus, Plaintiff alleges, there is no diversity of citizenship, and this action should be remanded to state court.

REMOVAL OF WORKER'S COMPENSATION ACTIONS

The parties to this action have overlooked one important statutory prohibition. Federal law specifically provides that a civil action in state court arising under the worker's compensation laws of that state may not be removed to any district court of the United States. 28 U.S.C. § 1445(c). No one disputes that Plaintiff's action alleges retaliation for filing worker's compensation claims.

Whether a case "arises under" the worker's compensation laws is a question of federal law. Thompson v. Cort Furniture Rental Corp., 797 F.Supp. 618, 619 (W.D. Tenn. 1992). This Court agrees with the reasoning in Thompson and finds that a suit alleging that an employee was discharged in retaliation for filing worker's compensation claims "arises under" the worker's compensation laws and, therefore, is nonremovable to federal court. Thompson, 797 F.Supp. at 624.

For this reason, Plaintiff's Motion to Remand is GRANTED, and this action is remanded to the Circuit Court for Davidson County, Tennessee.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Brown v. Fedex Freight, Inc.

United States District Court, M.D. Tennessee, Nashville Division
May 17, 2010
NO. 3:10-0301 (M.D. Tenn. May. 17, 2010)
Case details for

Brown v. Fedex Freight, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:ROY G. BROWN, JR. v. FEDEX FREIGHT, INC

Court:United States District Court, M.D. Tennessee, Nashville Division

Date published: May 17, 2010

Citations

NO. 3:10-0301 (M.D. Tenn. May. 17, 2010)

Citing Cases

Walker v. Marriott Hotel Servs., Inc.

Federal law provides that a civil action in any state court arising under the workers' compensation laws of…

Medlin v. Honeywell Analytics, Inc.

The Court also notes that a civil action in state court arising under the worker's compensation laws of that…