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.

Jean v. LP Port Charlotte, LLC

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Fort Myers Division

August 30, 2017

MARIE GERDA JEAN, Plaintiff,
v.
LP PORT CHARLOTTE, LLC, Defendant.

          OPINION AND ORDER [1]

          SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

          This matter comes before the Court on Defendant LP Port Charlotte, LLC’s Motion to Dismiss filed on April 4, 2017. (Doc. 40). Plaintiff Marie Gerda Jean filed a Response in Opposition on April 18, 2017. (Doc. 41). This matter is ripe for review.

         Background

          This action stems from both an arbitration award and allegations of discrimination and retaliation. (Docs. 37 at 1; 37-1). Jean sued LP Port Charlotte in Florida state court for breach of contract, discrimination, and retaliation. (Doc. 2). Thereafter, LP Port Charlotte removed the case. (Doc. 1). Jean then filed an amended complaint (Doc. 29) followed by LP Port Charlotte’s first motion to dismiss. (Doc. 33). The Court granted LP Port Charlotte’s motion to dismiss and dismissed the amended complaint without prejudice. (Doc. 36). Jean then filed a Second Amended Complaint (Doc. 37) pursuing these claims:

• Count I - Breach of Contract - Enforcement of Arbitration Award;
• Count II - Action per Federal Arbitration Act;
• Count III - Employment Discrimination Under the Florida Civil Rights Act;
• Count IV - Retaliation Under the Florida Civil Rights Act
• Count V - Employment Discrimination Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e; and
• Count VI - Retaliation Under Title VII.

         LP Port Charlotte now moves to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint for failure to state a claim. (Doc. 40 at 1). Jean argues her pleading is sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss. (Doc 41 at 2). The Court disagrees. For the reasons stated below, the Second Amended Complaint is dismissed in its entirety.

         Standard of Review

         A Rule 12(b)(6) motion tests the sufficiency of a complaint under the federal pleading rules. A claim fails this inspection if it asserts a legal theory that is not cognizable as a matter of law, or because its factual account is implausible. See Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 & 570 (2007). When deciding a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, the court presumes all well-pled factual allegations to be true, resolves all reasonable doubts and inferences in the plaintiffs favor, and views the complaint in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. See Id. at 555. A plaintiff must do more than offer labels, conclusions, and “a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678. The court will not accept as true bald assertions, conclusions, or legal conclusions “couched” as facts. Id. at 678-79; Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555. For claims to survive a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, therefore, the plaintiff’s allegations “must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555). A claim is facially plausible where the facts alleged permit the court to reasonably infer that defendant’s alleged misconduct was unlawful. Id.

         Besides the standard established under Iqbal-Twombly, plaintiffs must avoid shotgun pleadings. Since its inception, the Eleventh Circuit has waged an unceasing fight against shotgun pleadings. SeeWeiland v. Palm Beach County Sheriff's Off., 792 F.3d 1313, 1320 (11th Cir. 2015). The most common shotgun pleading is “a complaint containing multiple counts where each count adopts the allegations of all preceding counts, causing each successive count to carry all that came before it and the last count to be a combination of the entire complaint.” Id.When faced with a shotgun ...


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.