Summary
The United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana denied General Motors, LLC’s motion to dismiss D’Andre Harris’s amended Title VI employment-discrimination claim. The court held that Harris sufficiently alleged that General Motors received federal funds whose primary purpose was to provide employment and that he was discriminated against based on race. The opinion was entered on February 11, 2026.
Holdings
- A Title VI employment-discrimination claim is sufficiently pleaded when the complaint alleges that the defendant received federal funds, that the primary purpose of the funds was to provide employment, and that the defendant discriminated against the plaintiff in employment on the basis of race. Harris's specific allegations concerning federal funding sources and amounts, together with his allegation that the funding's primary purpose was employment, were sufficient at the pleading stage.
- The amended Title VI claim was facially plausible and stated a claim for relief; therefore, General Motors's motion to dismiss was denied.
Questions Presented
- Whether Harris's amended complaint plausibly alleged that General Motors was the recipient of federal financial assistance whose primary purpose was to provide employment, as required for a Title VI employment-discrimination claim.
- Whether Harris's allegations that General Motors received specified federal funds, that the primary purpose of the funds was employment, and that General Motors discriminated against him because of race were sufficient to survive a Rule 12(b)(6) motion.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (9)
- Brokaw v. Mercer Cnty., 235 F.3d 1000, 1006 (7th Cir. 2000)(followed)
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)(followed)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009)(followed)
- Crow Dog v. City of Indianapolis, 2005 WL 643363, at *5 (S.D. Ind. Mar. 18, 2005)(followed)
- Ahern v. Bd. of Educ. of Chicago, 133 F.3d 975, 976-78 (7th Cir. 1998)(followed)
- Doe ex rel. Doe v. St. Joseph’s Hosp. of Fort Wayne, 788 F.2d 411, 419 n.12 (7th Cir. 1986)(followed)
- Brown v. Budz, 398 F.3d 904, 914 (7th Cir. 2005)(considered)
- Rogers v. Board of Education of Prince George’s County, 859 F. Supp. 2d 742, 752 (D. Md. 2012)(persuasive)
- Sims v. Unified Government of Wyandotte County, 120 F. Supp. 2d 938, 956 (D. Kan. 2000)(persuasive)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…