Ahmed Eldib v. Bass Pro Outdoor World, L.L.C.

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:15-cv-00118-JAG. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999889843]. [15-1978]

Appeal: 15-1978

Doc: 22

Filed: 07/18/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-1978

AHMED ELDIB, D.D.S.,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
BASS PRO OUTDOOR WORLD,
Outdoor World; JOHN DOE,

L.L.C.,

d/b/a

Bass

Pro

Shops

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond.
John A. Gibney, Jr.,
District Judge. (3:15-cv-00118-JAG)

Submitted:

April 26, 2016

Decided:

July 18, 2016

Before WYNN, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kevin P. Shea, KEVIN P. SHEA, Hampton, Virginia, for Appellant.
James W. Walker, J. Brandon Sieg, VANDEVENTER BLACK, LLP,
Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-1978

Doc: 22

Filed: 07/18/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Dr. Ahmed Eldib appeals the district court’s order granting
Bass Pro Outdoor World, LLC’s (“Bass Pro”) motion to dismiss his
complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).
Eldib

argues

that

the

facts

alleged

in

his

complaint

were

sufficient for a jury to conclude that Bass Pro’s behavior was
extreme and outrageous, and that Eldib suffered severe emotional
distress.
claims

“Because

under

the

Federal

district

Rule

of

court

Civil

dismissed

Procedure

[Eldib’s]

12(b)(6)

for

failure to state a claim, we review legal issues de novo and
treat the facts alleged in the complaint as true.”

Nemphos v.

Nestle Waters N. Am., Inc., 775 F.3d 616, 617 (4th Cir. 2015).
In

Virginia,

infliction
“(1) the

of

to

establish

emotional

wrongdoer’s

liability

distress,

conduct

was

a

for

intentional

plaintiff

intentional

must
or

prove:

reckless;

(2) the conduct was outrageous and intolerable; (3) there was a
causal

connection

between

the

wrongdoer’s

conduct

and

the

emotional distress; and (4) the emotional distress was severe.”
Harris v. Kreutzer, 624 S.E.2d 24, 33 (Va. 2006).
the

second

element,

it

is

not

enough

that

the

To satisfy
conduct

is

“[i]nsensitive and demeaning”; rather, the conduct must be “so
outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go
beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as

2

Appeal: 15-1978

Doc: 22

Filed: 07/18/2016

Pg: 3 of 3

atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community.”
Id. (quoting Russo v. White, 400 S.E.2d 160, 162 (Va. 1991)).
Viewing the facts in the light most favorable to Eldib, he
encountered

unhelpful,

perhaps

incompetent,

employees

who

persisted in their incorrect belief that they were unable to
sell assault rifles to non-citizens.
above

the

level

annoyances,
Gaiters v.

of

petty
Lynn,

“mere

insults,

oppressions,

831

F.2d

This conduct does not rise

51,

indignities,

or
53

other

(4th

threats,

trivialities,”

Cir.

1987)

(quoting

Restatement (Second) of Torts § 46, cmt. d (1965)), and is less
“outrageous” than the behavior exhibited by the defendant in
Kreutzer, 624 S.E.2d at 33-34.

Furthermore, the comments were

not “manifestly disparaging or demeaning” of Eldib’s ethnicity
or national origin.
circumstances,

the

Eldib

to

failed

“outrageous

and

Gaiters, 831 F.2d at 54.
district

allege

court

correctly

sufficient

intolerable”

facts

requirement

infliction of emotional distress.

Under these

determined
to
of

that

satisfy

the

intentional

Kreutzer, 624 S.E.2d at 33.

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment.
dispense

with

contentions

are

oral

argument

adequately

because

presented

in

the
the

facts

We

and

legal

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
3