1. Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. BROWN v. SOUTHLAND 620 F.Supp. 1495 (E.D.Mo. 1985) Case Brief

2. Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. BROWN v. SOUTHLAND PURPOSE: Erie doctrine requires the federal court to apply pertinent state law in diversity cases.

3. Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. BROWN v. SOUTHLAND CAUSE OF ACTION: Wrongful discharge.

4. Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. BROWN v. SOUTHLAND FACTS: Plaintiff alleged Southland fired her to cover up management’s negligence. Southland removed case to federal court on diversity jurisdiction; Brown joined Zone Manager of Southland in attempt to defeat diversity (Zone Manager Tinsley was citizen of Missouri, the forum state).

5. Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. BROWN v. SOUTHLAND ISSUES: 1. Whether Zone Manager was improperly joined. 2. Whether cause of action should be dismissed.

6. Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. BROWN v. SOUTHLAND HOLDING: 1. Yes, remand to state court denied. 2. Yes, Missouri does not recognize cause of action.

7. Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. BROWN v. SOUTHLAND REASONING: 1. Zone Manager was not involved in discharge and was improperly joined. Hence motion for remand based on lack of total diversity is denied. 2. Missouri does not recognize wrongful discharge in at-will employment and federal court must follow Missouri law under Erie doctrine.