Martinez v. McGraw et al.

Filing 378

MEMORANDUM OF THE COURT. Signed by District Judge Todd J. Campbell on 10/10/12. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(rd)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NASHVILLE DIVISION

JAMES MARTINEZ
v.
SAMUEL TIMOTHY MCGRAW, et al.

)
)
) NO. 3-08-0738
) JUDGE CAMPBELL
)

MEMORANDUM
Pending before the Court, among other things, is Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss Intervenor
Chad Etheridge’s Complaint (Docket No. 372). For the reasons stated herein, Plaintiff’s Motion is
DENIED.
Intervenor Chad Etheridge filed a Motion to Intervene in this action (Docket No. 176), which
was granted by the Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 363). After his Motion to Intervene was granted,
Intervenor Etheridge filed a Complaint in Intervention (Docket No. 364), alleging that Plaintiff
Martinez herein hired Etheridge, an attorney, to represent him in this case and then breached a
contract with Etheridge by firing him without cause. Intervenor seeks damages for breach of contract
or, alternatively, quantum meruit, promissory estoppel or unjust enrichment. Docket No. 364. In
allowing the intervention, the Magistrate Judge specifically found that all proceedings with regard
to the Complaint in Intervention should be stayed pending a final disposition of the underlying
action. The Magistrate Judge also found that Mr. Etheridge should not be allowed to participate in
the litigation of the underlying action. Docket No. 363. This Court affirmed those findings. Docket
No. 376.
Plaintiff has moved to dismiss the Complaint in Intervention pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
12(b)(2), 12(b)(4), 12(b)(5), 12(b)(6) and 12 (e). Plaintiff first argues that he has not been properly

served with the Intervenor’s Complaint. Service was accomplished, however, pursuant to Fed. R.
Civ. P. 5(b)(3) and Local Rule 5.03(b). Plaintiff also contends that the Complaint in Intervention
fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
MOTIONS TO DISMISS
For purposes of a motion to dismiss, the Court must take all of the factual allegations in the
complaint as true. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009). To survive a motion to dismiss,
a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is
plausible on its face. Id. A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that
allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct
alleged. Id. Threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory
statements, do not suffice. Id. When there are well-pleaded factual allegations, a court should
assume their veracity and then determine whether they plausibly give rise to an entitlement to relief.
Id. at 1950. A legal conclusion couched as a factual allegation need not be accepted as true on a
motion to dismiss, nor are recitations of the elements of a cause of action sufficient. Fritz v. Charter
Township of Comstock, 592 F.3d 718, 722 (6th Cir. 2010).
DISCUSSION
Plaintiff argues that Intervenor has failed to plead details and facts to support each element
of his claims. The Court finds that, with one exception noted below, the Intervenor has sufficiently
pled his claims for breach of contract and other state law claims arising from Plaintiff’s contract with
Etheridge for legal services. Whether Intervenor will ultimately succeed on claiming a part of any
recovery Plaintiff may (or may not) make in this action, cannot be determined until the underlying
litigation is completed.

2

Intervenor’s Complaint (Docket No. 364) makes reference to certain documents, a contract
between Intervenor and Plaintiff and a document terminating Intervenor’s employment. Despite
Intervenor’s representations that these documents are attached as Exhibits 1 and 2, no such
documents have been filed. Intervenor shall file, by October 15, 2012, the referenced Exhibits 1 and
2 to his Complaint.
Moreover, the Court notes again and specifically orders that all proceedings with regard to
the Complaint in Intervention, including any deadlines for filing a responsive pleading thereto, are
STAYED pending a final disposition of the underlying action. In addition, Intervenor Etheridge
shall not participate in the litigation of the underlying action.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

___________________________________
TODD J. CAMPBELL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3