Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Hamilton v. Stodola, 4:16-cv-756-DPM. (2018)

Court: District Court, E.D. Arkansas Number: infdco20180220e38 Visitors: 10
Filed: Feb. 16, 2018
Latest Update: Feb. 16, 2018
Summary: ORDER D.P. MARSHALL, JR. , District Judge . 1. For the reasons stated on the record at the end of the hearing today, the Court made the following rulings on the pending motions: • The City Defendants' motion for summary judgment, No 45, is partly granted and partly denied without prejudice; • Ditech's and Clean Sweep's motions, No 49 & No 53, are partly granted and partly denied without prejudice; • The motion to strike Ditech's reply, No 87, is denied without prejudice as moot;
More

ORDER

1. For the reasons stated on the record at the end of the hearing today, the Court made the following rulings on the pending motions:

• The City Defendants' motion for summary judgment, No 45, is partly granted and partly denied without prejudice; • Ditech's and Clean Sweep's motions, No 49 & No 53, are partly granted and partly denied without prejudice; • The motion to strike Ditech's reply, No 87, is denied without prejudice as moot; and • The motion to strike Clean Sweep's reply, No 93, is denied.

2. All claims brought under the U.S. Constitution are dismissed with prejudice. The Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over all the remaining claims, which raise only matters of Arkansas law. 28U.S.C.§1367(c)(3).

3. The Court exercises its discretion and, rather than dismissing without prejudice, remands what remains of this removed case to the Circuit Court of Pulaski County, Arkansas. Carnegie-Mellon University v. Cohill, 484 U.S. 343 (1988).

So Ordered.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer