Malicious Prosecution

Listen to this article

Civil

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Officials: WOOD, Chief Judge, and POSNER and EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judges.

Malicious Prosecution

No. 14-1351 Charles Howlett v. Jeffrey Hack

Where appellant is held to be preempted from maintaining a malicious prosecution claim against respondent due to availability of adequate state remedy.

“This resolves all of Howlett’s federal claims. What re‐ main are his state‐law false‐arrest and malicious‐prosecution claims against Hack. In a situation like this one, where the state‐law claims have not been the focus of the litigation, the better practice is for the district court to relinquish its juris diction over them. See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3); Williams Electronics Games, Inc. v. Garrity, 479 F.3d 904, 907 (7th Cir. 2007) (describing the “presumption that if the federal claims drop out before trial, the district court should relinquish jurisdiction over the state‐law claims”). The district court offered no reason for declining to dismiss the remaining supplemental claims. In our view, that is what should have happened. Once the judgment is revised to show that these claims were dismissed without prejudice, Howlett will be free to seek to pursue them in state court.”

Affirmed & Remanded for Limited Purpose

Full Text

Attorney Derek A. Hawkins is the managing attorney at Hawkins Law Offices LLC, where he heads up the firm’s startup law practice. He specializes in business formation, corporate governance, intellectual property protection, private equity and venture capital funding and mergers & acquisitions. Check out the website at www.hawkins-lawoffices.com or contact them at 262-737-8825.