Laber et al v. United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union et al, No. 5:2013cv00640 - Document 27 (N.D. Ohio 2014)

Court Description: Order: On January 31, 2014, the Court entered a Memorandum Opinion and Order denying plaintiffs' motion to remand this action to state court. (Doc. No. 14 ). Plaintiffs sought reconsideration and also sought leave to amend their complain t to include a fraud claim. The Court denied reconsideration but ruled that plaintiffs' proposed fraud claim was not preempted by federal law. (Doc. No. 25 .) The Court afforded plaintiffs leave to amend their complaint to assert a fraud claim and remove all preempted claims. Plaintiffs have filed a fully compliant amended complaint that sets forth a state law claim for fraudulent misrepresentation and omits any claims that are dependent upon a federal labor contract. (Doc. No. 26 .) Havi ng reviewed plaintiffs' amended complaint, and recognizing that there is not complete diversity of parties or some other basis for federal jurisdiction, the Court remands this matter to the Summit County Court of Common Pleas. Judge Sara Lioi on 10/3/2014. (P,J)

Download PDF
Laber et al v. United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufac...Workers International Union et al Doc. 27 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION DONALD LABER, et al., PLAINTIFFS, vs. UNITED STEEL, PAPER AND FORESTRY, RUBBER, MANUFACTURING, ENERGY, ALLIED INDUSTRIAL AND SERVICE WORKERS INTERNATIONAL, et al., DEFENDANTS. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 5:13CV640 JUDGE SARA LIOI ORDER On January 31, 2014, the Court entered a Memorandum Opinion and Order denying plaintiffs’ motion to remand this action to state court. (Doc. No. 14.) In so ruling, the Court held that plaintiffs’ breach of contract and tortious interference with contract claims were completely preempted by § 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act. (Id. at 174.) Plaintiffs sought reconsideration and also sought leave to amend their complaint to include a fraud claim. The Court denied reconsideration but ruled that plaintiffs’ proposed fraud claim was not preempted by federal law. (Doc. No. 25.) The Court afforded plaintiffs leave to amend their complaint to assert a fraud claim and remove all preempted claims. (Id. at 244.) Plaintiffs have filed a fully compliant amended complaint that sets forth a state law claim for fraudulent misrepresentation and omits any claims that are dependent Dockets.Justia.com upon a federal labor contract. (Doc. No. 26.) Having reviewed plaintiffs’ amended complaint, and recognizing that there is not complete diversity of parties or some other basis for federal jurisdiction, the Court remands this matter to the Summit County Court of Common Pleas. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: October 3, 2014 HONORABLE SARA LIOI UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.