Free Motion to Remand to State Court - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:07-cv-OOO47—JJF Document 10 Filed O4/05/2007 Page 1 of 4
I IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT “ i
Eos THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE I me
JOHN P. GALLAGHER, : qw an · 1 pg 4, n l gg H pi E- y-
Plaintiff,
v. C.A. No. 07-47-JJ F i
E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND
COMPANY, :
Defendant.
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REMAND
COMES NOW, the Plaintiff`, by and through counsel, who hereby moves to
remand this case back to the Delaware Superior Court. The bases for this motion are as
follows:
1. Defendant’s purported basis for removal was that this matter arose under
and related to an employee benefit plan within the meaning of the Employee Retirement
Income Security Act, 29 U.S.C. §l()Ul g gg (hereinafter "ERlSA"). Thus, Defendant
contends that this Court has original jurisdiction based on a federal question.
2. A review of the Complaint shows clearly that the action is premised not on
any type of retirement pay or benefits, but on an oral promise to fairly compensate
Plaintiff for continuing to work on an ongoing employment project. It is contended by
Plaintiff that this promise was breached and recourse is available under state contract law,
promissory estoppel and/or the applicable state wage claim act. As such, the case does
not involve any ERISA claims or any other federal question.

Case 1:07-cv-OOO47—JJF Document 10 Filed O4/05/2007 Page 2 of 4
3. Federal jurisdiction exists only if a federal question is both affirmatively
and clearly stated on the face of the Complaint. M0ore’s Federal Practice 3d § 107.14
[3][H]- E, fag., Bracken v. Matgovranis, 296 F.3d 160 (3d Cir. 2002).
4. Since "proper removal requires that the asserted claims must necessarily
depend on the resolution of a substantial question of federal law", and here they do not,
this case should be remanded. Moore’s Federal Practice, supra.
WHEREFORE, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1447 Plaintiff respectfully requests that
the Court remand this matter to the Delaware Superior Court.
GARY A. BRIDE, P.A.
`Gar (DE Bar NO. 620)
Stone Mill Office Park
724 Yorklyn Road, Suite 100
Hockessin, DE 19707
Attorneys for Plaintiff
CHARLE - '- · R III, P.A.
Cha it 4 .433)
Stone Mill Office Park
724 Yorklyn Road, Suite 315
Hockessin, DE 19707
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Date: April 3, 2007

Case 1:07-cv-00047-JJF Document 10 Filed 04/05/2007 Page 3 of 4
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
JOHN P. GALLAGHER, :
Plaintiff,
v. C.A. N0. 07-47-JJF
E.l. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND
COMPANY, :
Defendant.
NOTICE OF MOTION
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the attached Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand by hand
delivery shall be considered at the convenience of the Court.
GARY A. BRY
*‘‘’t i““i` S
` — M I-
Gary A. B · : - = ar No. 620)
Stone Mill Office Park
724 Yorklyn Road, Suite 100
Hockessin, DE 19707
Attorneys for Plaintiff
CHARLES GRUVER III, P.A.
ai es ruver III (DE Bar o. @3)
Stone Mill Office Park
724 Yorklyn Road, Suite 315
Hockessin, DE 19707
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Dated: April 5, 2007

Case 1:07-cv-00047-JJF Document 10 Filed 04/05/2007 Page 4 of 4
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
JOHN P. GALLAGHER, :
Plaintiff, 2
v. C.A. No. 07-47-JJF
E.l, DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND
COMPANY, :
Defendant.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Gary A. Bryde, Esquire, counsel for Plaintiff, hereby certify that on this 5"`
day of April, 2007, did cause to be served two (2) copies of "Plaintiff`s Motion to Remand"
along with a copy of this Certificate of Service with the Court, and sent notification of same
via U.S. Mail to the following:
Kathleen Furey McDonough, Esquire
Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP
1313 North Market Street
P.O. Box 951
Wilmington, DE 19899-0951
Sarah Elizabeth DiLuzio, Esquire
Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP
1313 North Market Street
P.O. Box 951
Wilmington, DE 19899-0951
GARY A. E YDE, P.A.
Gar Ai Bry ` E Bar No. 620)
Stone Mill Office Park
724 Yorklyn Road, Suite 100
Hockessin, DE 19707
Attorneys for Plaintiff