Domeneque Perry v. Tiffany & Bosco PA

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Arizona screened Domeneque Perry’s complaint against Tiffany & Bosco, P.A. under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). The court dismissed claims alleging retaliation under OSHA, Title VII, Arizona law, and a failure to prevent retaliation because the complaint did not plausibly establish protected activity, causation, or another legal basis for relief. The court granted leave to amend within 30 days and granted Perry’s application to proceed in forma pauperis.

Holdings

1. OSHA does not provide Plaintiff with a private right of action, so the OSHA retaliation claim fails to state a claim.
2. Plaintiff failed to state a Title VII retaliation claim because she did not plausibly allege protected activity, a causal connection between the alleged activity and termination, or that the alleged activity was the but-for cause of her termination.
3. Plaintiff failed to state a wrongful-termination or retaliatory-discharge claim under the Arizona Employment Protection Act because she did not identify the Arizona law allegedly violated and did not plausibly allege that her internal report qualified as a statutory disclosure.
4. Plaintiff failed to state a claim for failure to prevent retaliation because she identified no legal basis for the claim and gave no reason why it should be treated differently from her deficient Title VII and AEPA claims.
5. Leave to amend should be granted because the pleading might be cured by alleging additional facts.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the complaint stated a viable retaliation claim under OSHA.
2. Whether the complaint plausibly stated a Title VII retaliation claim based on reports of indoor vaping and other alleged protected activity.
3. Whether the complaint plausibly stated an Arizona wrongful-termination or retaliatory-discharge claim under the Arizona Employment Protection Act.
4. Whether the complaint stated an independent claim for failure to prevent retaliation.
5. Whether Plaintiff should be granted leave to amend.

Disposition

dismissed