Earl v. Res-Care, Inc., et al.

Filing 15

ORDER denying 7 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. Signed by District Judge Terrence W. Boyle on 4/26/2016. (Romine, L.)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
EASTERN DIVISION
No. 4:15-CV-200-BO

STEPHEN L. EARL,

)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
V.

RES-CARE, INC. alk/a RES-CARE
HOME CARE, INC. and TRACI
HOLLOMAN,
Defendants.

ORDER

)

)
)
)
)
)

This cause comes before the Court on defendant Res-Care, Inc.'s motion to dismiss
pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) ofthe Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiffhas responded and
the matter is ripe for ruling. For the reasons discussed below, Res-Care's motion is denied.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff filed this action alleging discrimination in employment under Title VII of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964. 42 U.S.C. § 2000(e), et seq. Specifically, plaintiff alleges that he was
denied employment for a Clinician II position on the basis of his sex. Plaintiff alleges that he is
qualified to provide personal care services and was told by defendant Holloman, an executive
director of Res-Care, that he would not be considered for the position because he is male and the
individual to receive personal care services is female. Plaintiff filed a charge of discrimination
with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and received a right-to-sue letter on
November 19,2015.

DISCUSSION
A Rule 12(b)(6) motion tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint. Papasan v. Allain,
478 U.S. 265,283 (1986). When acting on a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), "the court
should accept as true all well-pleaded allegations and should view the complaint in a light most
favorable to the plaintiff." My/an Labs., Inc. v. Matkari, 7 F.3d 1130, 1134 (4th Cir.l993). A
complaint must allege enough facts to state a claim for relief that is facially plausible. Bell

Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). Facial plausibility means that the facts
pled "allow[] the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the
misconduct alleged"; mere recitals of the elements of a cause of action supported by conclusory
statements do not suffice. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009).
The Court has considered the allegations in the complaint in light of the applicable legal
standard and will allow the complaint to proceed. A plaintiff alleging employment
discrimination need not plead facts which constitute a prima facie case, but the allegations in the
complaint must still raise a right to relief that is above the speculative level. Coleman v.

Maryland Ct. ofAppeals, 626 F.3d 187, 190 (4th Cir. 2010) (citing Swierkiewicz v. Sorema NA.,
534 U.S. 506, 510-15, (2002)). Contrary to Res-Care's argument, plaintiffs complaint does not
"leave[] open to speculation the cause for the defendant's decision" not to hire him- plaintiff
alleges that defendant stated that plaintiff would not be hired because he is male. McCleary-

Evans v. Maryland Dept. ofTransp., State Hwy. Admin., 780 F.3d 582, 588 (4th Cir. 2015).
CONCLUSION
Though the complaint is not overly detailed, the Court finds that in this instance it
satisfies Rule 8's requirement of a short and plain statement giving defendant fair notice ofthe

2

claims against it. Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555 (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)). Accordingly, for the
foregoing reasons, Res-Care's motion to dismiss [DE 7] is DENIED.

SO ORDERED, this

JJ_ day of April, 2016.

-

;£~~
..- .....

/,.),

T RRENCE W. BOYLE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3