Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Thompson v. Cypress Grove Behavioral Healthcare

United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Monroe Division

July 3, 2019

BOBBIE THOMPSON
v.
CYPRESS GROVE BEHAVIORAL HEALTHCARE A/K/A MERIDIAN BEHAVIORAL HEALTH SYSTEMS F/K/A LIBERTY HEALTHCARE, ET AL.

          TERRY A. DOUGHTY MAG. JUDGE

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

          KAREN L. HAYES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         Before the undersigned Magistrate Judge, on reference from the District Court, is a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) filed by Defendant Corey Norris. [doc. # 8]. For reasons explained below, it is recommended that the motion be GRANTED.

         Background

         On April 16, 2019, Plaintiff Bobbie Thompson filed the above-captioned lawsuit against her former employer, Cypress Grove Behavioral Healthcare a/k/a Meridian Behavioral Health Systems f/k/a Liberty Healthcare (“Meridian”), and her co-employee and supervisor, Corey Norris (collectively, “Defendants”). [doc. # 1]. She alleges that Defendants subjected her “to a hostile work environment due to sexual harassment committed by” Norris, and Meridian “failed to take reasonable action or remedial measures upon notice” of the harassment, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., and Louisiana law. (Id. ¶ 3).

         On May 28, 2019, Norris filed the instant motion to dismiss the claims asserted against him by Thompson. [doc. # 8]. Norris contends that neither Title VII nor Louisiana law permits Thompson to recover against Norris, an individual employee of Meridian. [doc. # 8-1 at 1].

         On June 14, 2019, Thompson filed a motion for leave of court to file an Amended Complaint, [doc. # 10], which the Court granted, [doc. # 12]. The Amended Complaint adds causes of action against Norris under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) and for “battery and assault, sexual battery, sexual assault, and intentional infliction of emotional distress” under Louisiana law. [doc. # 13 ¶¶ 3(a), 47(a)]. That same day, she filed an opposition to the motion to dismiss, agreeing that Norris “may not be held individually liable in a supervisory capacity under Title VII.” [doc. # 11 at 1]. However, she claims Norris can be held liable (1) under the FLSA because the FLSA allows suits against both employers and supervisors; and (2) for battery and assault, sexual battery, sexual assault, and intentional infliction of emotional distress because Louisiana law provides remedies for these claims. (Id. at 5).

         In light of the amendment, the Court extended the deadline for Norris to reply to Plaintiff's opposition until June 28, 2019, so that Norris could address the allegations contained in the Amended Complaint. [doc. # 14]. Norris did not file a reply.

         Standard of Law

          Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) sanctions dismissal when a plaintiff fails “to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.” A pleading states a claim for relief when, inter alia, it contains “a short and plain statement . . . showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2).

         “To survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.'” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). A claim is facially plausible when it contains sufficient “factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Id. Plausibility requires more than just the “sheer possibility” that a defendant acted unlawfully, id.; it calls for enough facts “to raise a reasonable expectation that discovery will reveal evidence” to support the elements of the claim. Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556. Mere “labels and conclusions” or “a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action” do not suffice. Id. at 555.

         In deciding a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, a court must accept as true all factual allegations contained in the complaint, although the same presumption does not extend to legal conclusions. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678. A court may permit a well-pleaded complaint to proceed even when “actual proof of those facts is improbable” or recovery is unlikely. Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556. But a court will dismiss a complaint “where the well-pleaded facts do not permit the court to infer more than the mere possibility of misconduct.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 679.

         Discussion

          ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.