Miller v. American Fidelity Insurance Agency, Inc., 16-00800-BAJ-EWD. (2018)
Court: District Court, M.D. Louisiana
Number: infdco20180726810
Visitors: 2
Filed: Jul. 13, 2018
Latest Update: Jul. 13, 2018
Summary: ORDER BRIAN A. JACKSON , Chief District Judge . Before the Court is the Motion to Remand (Doc. 28), filed by all Plaintiffs. Defendants have not responded. This case was removed by Defendant, Hartford Insurance Company of the Midwest, on the basis of federal question jurisdiction over claims involving its administration and handling of Plaintiffs' Standard Flood Insurance Policy issued in accordance with the National Flood Insurance Program ("NFIP"). (Doc. 1 at 5-15). State claims rel
Summary: ORDER BRIAN A. JACKSON , Chief District Judge . Before the Court is the Motion to Remand (Doc. 28), filed by all Plaintiffs. Defendants have not responded. This case was removed by Defendant, Hartford Insurance Company of the Midwest, on the basis of federal question jurisdiction over claims involving its administration and handling of Plaintiffs' Standard Flood Insurance Policy issued in accordance with the National Flood Insurance Program ("NFIP"). (Doc. 1 at 5-15). State claims rela..
More
ORDER
BRIAN A. JACKSON, Chief District Judge.
Before the Court is the Motion to Remand (Doc. 28), filed by all Plaintiffs. Defendants have not responded. This case was removed by Defendant, Hartford Insurance Company of the Midwest, on the basis of federal question jurisdiction over claims involving its administration and handling of Plaintiffs' Standard Flood Insurance Policy issued in accordance with the National Flood Insurance Program ("NFIP"). (Doc. 1 at ¶¶ 5-15). State claims related to the handling of flood insurance policies issued under the NFIP and related programs are preempted by federal law, but claims related to procurement of policies issued under the NFIP are not. See Campo v. Allstate Ins. Co., 562 F.3d 751, 754, 758 (5th Cir. 2009). The party that issued the policy and, accordingly, was responsible for the handling of the NFIP policy has been dismissed. (Doc. 25). The court has the discretion to "remand supplemental state law claims when it has dismissed the claims that provide the basis for original jurisdiction." Giles v. NYLCare Health Plans, Inc., 172 F.3d 332, 339 (5th Cir. 1999). Considering the economy, fairness, convenience, and comity of this case, the Court finds that remand is appropriate under the circumstances. See id.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that the motion (Doc. 28) is GRANTED and that the above-captioned case is hereby REMANDED to the 21st Judicial District Court, Parish of Livingston, Louisiana.
Source: Leagle
