MARQUIS v. FARM SERVICE AGENCY et al
OPINION filed. Signed by Judge Anne E. Thompson on 2/2/2017. (mmh)
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES DIST CT COURT
DISTRICT OF NE JERSEY
FEB O3 2017
WILLIAM T. WALSH
Civ. No. 14-6715
FARM SERVICE AGENCY, UNITED
STATES DEPARTMENT OF
AGRICULTURE, THOMAS ORGO,
CYNTHIA FOISTER, and PAUL HLUBIK,
Defendants. THOMPSON, U.S.D.J.
This matter has come before the Court on the
otion to dismiss brought by Defendants
\-Fa.mi S_ervice_Agency ("FSA"), United St~tes Departm nt of Agriculture ("USDA"), Thomas
- Orgo ("I?efendant Orgo"), Cynthia Foister ("Defendan Foister''), and_ Paul Hlubik ("Defendant
-___· Hlub~")(collectively ''Defendants~;).:
The motion is -
opposed.1 -- The Court has decided the
-motiOn based on the written submissions and without o al argument pursuant to Local Civil Rule
78.l(b). For the reasons stated he:rein, Defendants' mo ion will be granted; Count I of the
Complaint is dismissed.with prejudice;_ Count II of the omplaint is dismissed without prejudice.
The Court provides Plaintiff fifteen (15) days from the ate of the Order accompanying this
Opinion to amend the Complaintwith;respectto Count L
Despite this Court granting Plaintiffm~ltiple extensio -s of time to file an opposition to
Defendant's motion to dismiss, Plaintiff has failed to ti ely oppose Defendant's motion.
The Complaint of Plaintiff Lorrie Marquis ("P aintiff') asserts state-law claims for
breach of contract and fraud against the Defendants.
lairttiff makes the following allegations.
Plaintiff is a former employee of the FSA. (Comp!., , ECF No. 1). Plaintiff alleges that
Defendant Orgo, a co-worker, sexually harassed her
to her superior, Defendant Foister. (Id.
mf 12, 13).
d that she reported the sexual harassment
D fendant Foister conducted an investigation
and issued a report that resulted in a finding that Plain ifr s claim of sexual harassment was not
W 13, 14).
That inyestigation and ubsequent report were biased, incomplete,
and:procured as a result of fraud because Defendant 0 go misrepresented the facts, Defendant
Foister purposefully and knowingly failed to properly nvestigate Plaintiffs claims and
·Defendant Hlu~_i~~9ll.~P!~~~~ith Foist~ to ensure tha .the.sexual assault investigation and
subs-equerit-report exonerated Orgo. (Id.
Pl intiff was subjected to retaliation in the
fonn of an·: unwarranted :written-reprimand and unfavor ble temporary work assignment. (Id. , ,
· 19~2l)>"As~_a result of this fraud perpetrated by Defen ants, Plaintiff left the employ of the FSA..
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b) 1)
-: -~-· ·-·In this case,-Plaintifr.s Complaint seeks·1noney damages, attorney's f~es, litigation costs,
and interest;· -(See Compt)~- Howev
, Plaintiff fails to specify whether her
breachofcbntractclaintfound.inCountTwo·seeks.mo e or less than $lO;OOo:~The only way
that this Courtwould have jurisdiction-over.Plaintiff's ole remaining clai~wmild be if Plaintiff
were seeking d~~ges of$~ 0~000 or less. ·Therefore,
e Court will· dismiss. Count II of the
Complaint without prejudice and grant Plaintiff fifteen ays to amend Count Two of her
Complaint to demonstrate .that she:is··seeking damages i the amount of$ l 0,000. or less. and that
this Court has jurisdiction over h~r'·sole-·remairiing clai ·
· 3. Title VII Additionally, Defendants argu
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?