Filing 8

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 7 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. Ordered by US DISTRICT JUDGE CLAY D. LAND on 11/9/2017 (tlf).

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA COLUMBUS DIVISION ERIKA J. LOCKETTE, * Plaintiff, * vs. * COLUMBUS CONSOLIDATED GOVERNMENT, * CASE NO. 4:17-CV-47 (CDL) * Defendant. * O R D E R Plaintiff Erika Lockette alleges that she is employed by the Columbus Court of alleged Consolidated Muscogee employer, Government County. CCG, for She race (“CCG”) asserts and age in claims the Juvenile against her discrimination and retaliation pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. Defendant seeks dismissal of Plaintiff’s Complaint, contending that CCG is not Plaintiff’s employer and that the actions taken against her were taken by employees of the Juvenile Court of Muscogee County, acting in their capacity as state officers and not as agents of CCG. Defendant seeks dismissal of Plaintiff’s age discrimination claim because she never presented that claim to the EEOC and thus has failed to exhaust her administrative remedies as to that claim. Defendant’s motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s Title discrimination and retaliation claims must be denied. VII Although the record may be different at summary judgment, the present record, which is restricted to the allegations in Plaintiff’s Complaint, establishes that discriminatory and retaliatory adverse employment actions were taken against her as an employee of CCG. Plaintiff has clearly stated a claim under Title VII, and CCG’s motion to dismiss her race and retaliation Title VII claims is denied. Plaintiff never mentioned an age discrimination claim in her EEOC charge. Therefore, the Court finds that she has failed to exhaust her administrative remedies as to that claim, and it must be dismissed. Plaintiff’s other claims for race discrimination and retaliation are reasonably connected to her charge of dismissed (ECF No. 7) discrimination, at is this and time. granted as those claims Defendant’s to Plaintiff’s shall motion ADEA to claim not be dismiss and is denied in all other respects. IT IS SO ORDERED, this 9th day of November, 2017. S/Clay D. Land CLAY D. LAND CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?