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.

Caesar v. Louisiana Tech University

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

November 4, 2019

ROSLYN J CAESAR
v.
LOUISIANA TECH UNIVERSITY

          TERRY A. DOUGHTY, JUDGE

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

          KAREN L. HAYES, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         Before the Court is Louisiana Tech University's motion to dismiss the plaintiff's complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. This matter has been referred to the undersigned for review, report, and recommendation in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 and the standing orders of the Court.

         Because Louisiana Tech University is an arm of the State of Louisiana, a suit against it is barred by sovereign immunity. Thus, the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction and the motion to dismiss should be GRANTED.

         Background

         On May 11, 2016, plaintiff Roslyn J. Caesar filed a charge of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”), alleging disability discrimination in violation of Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”), 42 § U.S.C. 12111, et seq. Caesar alleges she was employed by Louisiana Tech University as an Administrative Coordinator in a bookstore located on the university's campus. In May 2015, Caesar had surgery on her shoulder. Caesar was granted leave under the Family Medical Leave Act from May 29, 2015, through August 21, 2015. Following this leave, she was unable to return to work. On August 26, 2015, Caesar received a letter from Shella S. Trammel informing her that since she had not returned to work and had less than eight (8) hours of sick leave, her employment would be terminated. In September 2015, plaintiff's physician informed Caesar that she could perform sedentary duties but could not otherwise return to work. Her employment was terminated effective September 14, 2015. Thereafter, Caesar properly submitted a charge of discrimination to the EEOC in 2016. By letter dated July 24, 2018, the EEOC proposed a conciliation agreement, but on September 11, 2018, EEOC issued a Notice of Conciliation Failure.

         By letter dated April 23, 2019, the U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division issued a Notice of Right to Sue Within 90 Days to Caesar. The Notice advised Caesar that she had the right to institute a civil action under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 § U.S.C. 1211, et seq. against Louisiana Tech.

         On July 16, 2019, Roslyn J. Caesar filed the instant complaint against Louisiana Tech University, alleging that following her shoulder surgery, her doctor wrote a letter asking for light duty to prevent her from injuring her shoulder. Caesar claims that Louisiana Tech chose not to work with her on finding a suitable arrangement.

         On August 23, 2019, Caesar, with the aid of counsel, filed her first amended complaint. Therein, she sought “an award for damages resulting from her lost wages from the date of her termination, such future wages as are allowed, attorney's fees, and costs, as well as any and all other relief available under either law or equity.”

         On October 8, 2019, Louisiana Tech filed a motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under Rule 12(b)(1). [doc. # 13]. On October 25, 2019, Caesar filed her memorandum in opposition to the motion to dismiss. [doc. # 15]. The matter is ripe.[1]

         Law and Analysis

         I. Rule 12(b)(1) Standard.

         Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) provides for dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Lack of subject matter jurisdiction may be found in three instances: (1) the complaint alone; (2) the complaint supplemented by undisputed facts evidenced in the record; or (3) the complaint supplemented by undisputed facts plus the court's resolution of disputed facts. Barrera-Montenegro v. United States, 74 F.3d 657, 659 (5th Cir. 1996).

         The burden of proof for a Rule 12(b)(1) motion to dismiss is on the party asserting jurisdiction; therefore, the plaintiff must demonstrate that jurisdiction exists. Ramming v. United States, 281 F.3d 158, 161 (5th Cir. 2001)(internal citations omitted). Accordingly, the plaintiff constantly bears the burden of proof that jurisdiction ...


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.