Where a woman alleged her former employer retaliated against her in violation of the Virginia Whistleblower Protection Act when she complained its conduct violated the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the case was improperly removed to federal court. Whether the company violated the Virginia-whistleblower law did not require resolution of any federal question.
Background
In this removed case, Bridget Hinchman sued her former employer alleging state law claims for gender- and sex-based disparate treatment and harassment, in violation of the Virginia Human Rights Act. Plaintiff also claims that she was retaliated against and terminated, in violation of the Virginia Whistleblower Protection Act when she reported to her employer that the employer’s practice of recording goods as present in a warehouse even if the goods had not yet been received violated the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.
Performance Food Group Inc. responded by removing this case to federal court on the ground that the complaint raised a federal question and then moving to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff has now moved to remand this case to state court, arguing that no federal question is raised in the complaint.
Analysis
Federal-question jurisdiction over state-law causes of action is proper where “the plaintiffs right to relief necessarily depends on resolution of a substantial question of federal law.” The Supreme Court has emphasized that a federal question is raised and actually disputed only if a...
Park Filed Complaint Against President Lee Ahead of 2021 Election Jang Youngha Sentenced to One Year in Prison, Two Years Probation Confirmed The police have launched an investigation into Park Chu...