Sam Jackson v. Volunteers of America, Inc., et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana partially grants and partially denies two motions to dismiss in Sam Jackson’s pro se employment-discrimination action. The court dismisses claims under the ADA and ADEA, claims against individual defendants, and unexhausted Title VII claims, while allowing certain race- and religion-based Title VII claims against organizational defendants to proceed subject to amendment. The court grants Jackson thirty days to file an amended complaint with more detailed factual allegations.

Holdings

1. Jackson's complaint contained no factual allegations supporting an ADEA or ADA claim; all claims under those statutes were dismissed.
2. Title VII does not impose individual liability on defendants in either their individual or official capacities; Jackson's Title VII claims against Mullan, Brown, Stereal, and Anderson were dismissed.
3. Jackson exhausted only claims that were like or related to the allegations in his EEOC charges. Because the Volunteers charge alleged only race- or religion-based discrimination and the Express charge alleged only race-based discrimination, his other Title VII theories were unexhausted and were dismissed.
4. Jackson sufficiently alleged an employment relationship with VOASELA at the motion-to-dismiss stage.
5. The court declined to dismiss the remaining Title VII claims with prejudice and granted Jackson thirty days to amend his complaint with more complete factual allegations.
6. The court declined to dismiss Express Services's claims based on a seven-day delay in service.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Jackson stated claims under the ADEA or ADA.
2. Whether Title VII claims could proceed against the individual defendants.
3. Whether Jackson exhausted his administrative remedies for the various Title VII theories asserted in the complaint.
4. Whether Jackson sufficiently alleged an employment relationship with VOASELA.
5. Whether the remaining Title VII claims against VOASELA and Express Services should be dismissed for failure to state a claim, or whether Jackson should receive leave to amend.
6. Whether Express Services's allegedly late service warranted dismissal under Rules 12(b)(4) or 12(b)(5).

Disposition

other