Gueye v. GAP INC. et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: It is ordered that 1) Corvel Corporation's motion to dismiss 11 is GRANTED; 2) Safety National Casualty Corporation's motion to dismiss 20 be and is hereby GRANTED; 3) Corvel Corporation and Safety National Casualty Corporation be and are hereby DISMISSED as parties. Signed by Judge William O. Bertelsman on 01/14/2014.(TED)cc: COR. Amar Gueye via U.S. Mail
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2013-144
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
GAP, INC., ET AL.
This is an action by Amar Gueye (“Plaintiff”), against Gap,
Inc., Corvel Corp., and Safety National Casualty Corp., under
Title VII for age, race, color, and national origin
This matter is before the Court on Corvel Corp.’s motion to
dismiss, (Doc. 11), and Safety National Casualty Corp.’s motion
to dismiss, (Doc. 20).
Having reviewed the parties’ briefs, the Court
concludes that oral argument is unnecessary to the resolution of
The Court therefore issues the following
Memorandum Opinion and Order.
Plaintiff alleges he worked for GAP, INC., and was
terminated on November 11, 2012.
(Doc. 1 pp. 2-3).
notified his boss Kelly Manning that his back, hands, chest, and
muscles were in pain after lifting between 500 and 2000 boxes.
Page 1 of 4
(Doc. 1 p. 2).
Plaintiff was terminated the same day and was
told that business was slow.
(Doc. 1 p. 3).
alleges that his facility was hiring warehouse workers (the
department Plaintiff worked for), and that he was scheduled to
work overtime for the rest of the week.
(Doc. 1 p. 2-3).
Plaintiff alleges that after he filed his worker’s
compensation claim, Corvel Corp. and Safety National Casualty
Corp. (“Defendants”), submitted a false injury date and other
The Defendants submitted this false and
misleading information so they could reject Plaintiff’s worker’s
Plaintiff’s worker’s compensation claim was
voluntarily withdrawn from the Administrative Law Judge by the
Plaintiff and never refiled.
A. Plaintiff fails to state a proper Title VII claim
against Defendants (Corvel and Safety National).
Plaintiff is acting pro se and as such, the Court liberally
construes Plaintiff’s complaint and filings.
Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (“A document filed pro se is to
be liberally construed, and a pro se complaint, however
inartfully pleaded, must be held to less stringent standards
than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers[.]”).
Cf. FED. R. CIV.
However, Plaintiff fails to allege an employment
Page 2 of 4
relationship between himself and Corvel Corp. or Safety National
This failure is fatal to his Title VII claim.
Further, Plaintiff alleges no discriminatory conduct by these
Defendants, which is also fatal to his Title VII claim.
Plaintiff also appears, in his reply briefs, to allege a
worker’s compensation claim.
However, any such claim fails
because Plaintiff did not exhaust his administrative remedies as
required by Kentucky law.
Popplewell's Alligator Dock No. 1,
Inc. v. Revenue Cabinet, 133 S.W.3d 456, 471 (Ky. 2004)
(“Usually, a party is required to exhaust available
administrative remedies before seeking judicial relief.”); KRS §
13B.140(2) (“A party may file a petition for judicial review
only after the party has exhausted all administrative remedies
available within the agency whose action is being challenged,
and within any other agency authorized to exercise
Because Plaintiff failed to exhaust
his administrative remedies, he cannot properly state a worker’s
(Doc. 20-2) (showing Plaintiff voluntarily
withdrew his worker’s compensation claim).
In Plaintiff’s reply memorandum, Plaintiff appears to raise
a Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO)
claim against Defendants for allegedly falsifying facts in
Plaintiff’s worker’s compensation claim.
However, such a claim
cannot be maintained in the Sixth Circuit.
Page 3 of 4
Jackson v. Sedgwick
Claims Mgmt. Servs., Inc., 731 F.3d 556, 566 (6th Cir. 2013)
(“Accordingly, racketeering activity leading to a loss or
diminution of benefits the plaintiff expects to receive under a
workers' compensation scheme does not constitute an injury to
“business or property” under RICO.”).
Thus, Plaintiff’s Title VII claim fails to allege
Defendants were employers or took discriminatory action,
Plaintiff’s worker’s compensation claim fails to allege an
exhaustion of administrative remedies, and Plaintiff’s RICO
claim is not a claim upon which relief can be granted.
Therefore, having reviewed this matter, and the Court being
otherwise sufficiently advised,
IT IS ORDERED (1) that Corvel Corporation’s motion to
dismiss (Doc. 11) be, and is hereby, GRANTED; (2) that Safety
National Casualty Corporation’s motion to dismiss (Doc. 20) be,
and is hereby, GRANTED; and (3) Corvel Corporation and Safety
National Casualty Corporation be, and are hereby, DISMISSED as
This 14th day of January, 2014.
Page 4 of 4
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?