Summary
The United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee denied Vanderbilt University’s motion to dismiss Erin Barton’s amended complaint under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(5) and 12(b)(6). The court extended the time for service and held that the allegations plausibly supported claims of sex and sexual-orientation discrimination under Title VII and the Tennessee Human Rights Act.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the action should be dismissed under Rule 12(b)(5) because Barton failed to serve Vanderbilt within the time required by Rule 4(m).
- Whether the amended complaint plausibly alleged that Vanderbilt terminated Barton because of her sex or sexual orientation in violation of Title VII.
- Whether the amended complaint plausibly alleged discrimination under the Tennessee Human Rights Act, including discrimination based on sexual orientation.
Holdings
- The court denied dismissal under Rule 12(b)(5) and exercised its discretion to extend the time for service because the delay was approximately two months, Vanderbilt had notice within the original service period, Vanderbilt consented to a 30-day extension, the additional delay was not shown to be materially prejudicial, and dismissal would cause Barton's claims to become time-barred.
- The amended complaint plausibly alleged discriminatory animus and therefore stated a Title VII discrimination claim sufficient to survive Rule 12(b)(6).
- The court denied dismissal of Barton's THRA claim because Vanderbilt provided no reason to depart from the court's prior conclusion that the claim should not be dismissed absent a clear indication that the THRA is more limited than Title VII.
Key quotations
“Overall, consideration of these factors weighs in favor of extending the time for service and denying Defendant’s motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(5).”
“The Court finds these allegations are sufficient to plausibly allege discriminatory animus.”
Factual background
Erin Barton was a tenured associate professor at Vanderbilt University and publicly came out as gay in late 2021. After a voluntary retreat for graduate students in March 2022, Vanderbilt administrators expressed concerns based on social-media photographs, accused the retreat of promoting sexualized messaging and grooming, and investigated Barton for alleged misconduct. The investigation referenced Barton's same-sex partner, and Barton alleged that similarly situated straight and male faculty members had conducted comparable retreats without similar scrutiny. Vanderbilt terminated Barton's employment effective January 27, 2024.
Procedural history
Barton filed the action on July 11, 2025, and later filed an amended complaint asserting Title VII and Tennessee Human Rights Act discrimination claims. The court extended the service deadline by 30 days, but Barton served Vanderbilt on December 2, 2025, after the extended deadline. Vanderbilt moved to dismiss; after briefing, the court denied the motion.