Birl-Johnson v. Regions Bank (MAG+)

Filing 27

JUDGMENT: it is the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the court as follows: (1) The United States Magistrate Judge's recommendation (doc. no. 25 ) is adopted. (2) Defendant's motion to dismiss (doc. no. 11 ) is denied as to plaintiff's Title VII and § 1981 claims of race discrimination based on unlawful demotion; and as to her Title VII and § 1981 claims of retaliation in the form of unlawful demotion. (3) Defendant's motion to dismiss (doc. no. 11 ) is granted as t o plaintiff's Title VII and § 1981 claims of race discrimination in the form of constructive discharge and of retaliation in the form of constructive discharge, her age-discrimination claims, her state and federal whistleblower-retaliation claims, and her state claims of breach of implied contract and the tort of outrage; and these claims are dismissed. (4) Defendant's motion for more definite statement (doc. no. 11 ) is denied. The clerk of the court is DIRECTED to enter this do cument on the civil docket as a final judgment pursuant to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This case is not dismissed and is referred back to the United States Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 9/11/2015. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Appeals Checklist)(kh, )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION

DOROTHY BIRL-JOHNSON,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
REGIONS BANK d/b/a Regions )
Mortgage,
)
)
Defendant.
)

CIVIL ACTION NO.
2:14cv1059-MHT
(WO)

JUDGMENT
In accordance with the memorandum opinion entered
today, it is the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the
court as follows:
(1) The

United

States

Magistrate

Judge's

recommendation (doc. no. 25) is adopted.
(2) Defendant’s motion to dismiss (doc. no. 11) is
denied as to plaintiff’s Title VII and § 1981 claims of
race discrimination based on unlawful demotion; and as
to her Title VII and § 1981 claims of retaliation in
the form of unlawful demotion.

(3) Defendant’s motion to dismiss (doc. no. 11) is
granted as to plaintiff’s Title VII and § 1981 claims
of

race

discrimination

discharge

and

of

in

the

form

retaliation

of

in

constructive

the

form

of

constructive discharge, her age-discrimination claims,
her state and federal whistleblower-retaliation claims,
and her state claims of breach of implied contract and
the tort of outrage; and these claims are dismissed.
(4) Defendant’s motion for more definite statement
(doc. no. 11) is denied.
The clerk of the court is DIRECTED to enter this
document

on

the

civil

pursuant

to

Rule

58

of

docket
the

as

a

Federal

final
Rules

judgment
of

Civil

Procedure.
This case is not dismissed and is referred back to
the

United

States

Magistrate

Judge

for

further

proceedings.
DONE, this the 11th day of September, 2015.

/s/ Myron H. Thompson____
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE