Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

HACKETT v. ST. JUDE MEDICAL S.C., INC., 8:15-cv-1971-T-30JSS. (2015)

Court: District Court, M.D. Florida Number: infdco20151027962 Visitors: 3
Filed: Oct. 26, 2015
Latest Update: Oct. 26, 2015
Summary: ORDER JAMES S. MOODY, Jr. , District Judge . THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant St. Jude Medical's Motion for Attorneys' Fees (Dkt. 14). The Court has considered the motion and the applicable law. For the following reasons, the motion will be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. On October 6, 2015, this Court granted St. Jude's motion to transfer this case to the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota, under 28 U.S.C. 1404(a), because the Court found that the
More

ORDER

THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant St. Jude Medical's Motion for Attorneys' Fees (Dkt. 14). The Court has considered the motion and the applicable law. For the following reasons, the motion will be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

On October 6, 2015, this Court granted St. Jude's motion to transfer this case to the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota, under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), because the Court found that the parties had entered into a valid forum-selection clause as part of an employment contract. The case was reopened in that district on October 14, 2015 and assigned case number 0:15-cv-03854.

Now St. Jude asks this Court to impose attorneys' fees on Plaintiff's counsel, as authorized by 28 U.S.C. § 1927, because Plaintiff's counsel filed a civil complaint in this district and argued that the parties' forum-selection clause was invalid. St. Jude calls this conduct "unreasonable and vexatious." (Dkt. 14, p. 5).

But this Court has already transferred the case, as St. Jude requested. And the case has been reopened in the District of Minnesota. The Court therefore no longer has jurisdiction to rule on this or any motion in the case. See Dombrowski v. Swiftshops, Inc., 864 F.Supp. 1242, 1254 (S.D. Fla. 1994) (concluding that "a court renounces its jurisdiction over a case the moment the court completes transfer under 1404(a)") (citing Roofing & Sheet Metal Services, Inc. v. La Quinta Motor Inns, Inc., 689 F.2d 982, 988-89 (11th Cir. 1982)); accord In Re Nine Mile Ltd., 673 F.2d 242, 243 (8th Cir. 1982)

It is therefore ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:

1. Defendant's Motion for Attorneys' Fees (Dkt. 14) is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. 2. The Clerk is directed to forward Defendant's Motion and this Order to the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota. 3. All other pending motions are DENIED as moot. 4. The Clerk is directed to close this file.

DONE and 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