DeVerna v. Rite Aid of North Carolina, Inc. et al
ORDER: the court DISMISSES as moot defendants' motion to dismiss [D.E. 7] and GRANTS Lee's motion to dismiss [D.E. 21]. Plaintiff's IIED claim is DISMISSED for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted. Signed by Chief Judge James C. Dever III on 8/2/2017. (Jenkins, C.)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
RITE AID OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.,
RITE AID HDQTRS, CORP., JIN LEE,
ECKERD CORPORATION d/b/a RITE AID,
On March 2, 2017, defendants Rite Aid ofNorth Carolina, Inc., and Rite Aid Hdqtrs. Corp.
(collectively "defendants") moved to dismiss plaintiff Susan Devema's intentional infliction of
emotional distress ("liED") claim [D.E. 7]. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). On March 30, 2017,
Devema voluntarily dismissed her liED claim against defendants and limited that claim to defendant
Jin Lee ("Lee") individually [D.E. 20].
OnApril18, 2017, Lee moved to dismiss Devema's liED claim [D.E. 21]. See Fed. R. Civ.
P. 12(b)(6). On May 4, 2017, Devemaresponded in opposition [D.E. 25]. On May 9, 2017, Lee
replied [D .E. 26].
The court has reviewed Devema' s liED claim under the governing s_tandard. See Fed. R.
Civ. P. 12(b)(6); Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662,677-78 (2009); Bell Atl. Cor,p. v. Twombly, 550
U.S. 544, 555-63, 570 (2007); Coleman v. Md. Ct. of A~~eals, 626 F.3d 187, 190 (4th Cir. 2010),
aff'd, 566 U.S. 30 (2012); Nemet Chevrolet. Ltd. v. Consumeraffairs.com. Inc., 591 F.3d 250,255
(4th Cir. 2009); Giarratano v. Johnso!1,521 F.3d 298, 302 (4th Cir. 2008).
Devema' s liED claim against Lee fails to state a claim upon which relied can be granted.
Compare Compl. [D.E. 1] ,, 56--60, with Bratcher v. Phar. Prod. Dev.. Inc., 545 F. Supp. 2d 533,
544-45 (E.D.N.C. 2008); Efird v. Riley. 342 F. Supp. 2d 413,426-27 (M.D.N.C. 2004); Thomas
v. N. Telecom. Inc., 157F. Supp. 2d627, 634-36 (M.D.N.C. 2000); see also Waddlev. Sparks, 331
N.C. 73, 82,414 S.E.2d 22,27 (1992); Dickens v. Puryear, 302 N.C. 437,452-53,276 S.E.2d 325,
335 (1981); Hogan v. Forsyth Country Club Co., 79 N.C. App. 483, 490, 340 S.E.2d 116, 121
In sum, the court DISMISSES as moot defendants' motion to dismiss [D.E. 7] and GRANTS
Lee's motion to dismiss [D.E. 21]. Plaintiff's rr:ED claim is DISMISSED for failure to state a claim
on which relief can be granted.
SO ORDERED. This k_ day of August 2017.
J£1s c. n~ rii
Chief United States District Judge
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?