Coffee v. Department of Juvenile Justice et al

Filing 22

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge John A. Gibney, Jr on 7/18/14. Copy sent: Yes (tdai, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
Richmond Division

EVALYN D. COFFEE,

Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 3:14-cv-262-JAG

v.

DEPARTMENT OF JUVENILE JUSTICE, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter comes before the Court on the defendants' motion to dismiss. (Dk. No. 28.)

The plaintiff, a former correctional officer at Virginia's Department of Juvenile Justice, brings
two counts—a retaliation claim under Title VII, and a discrimination claim under the Americans

with Disabilities Act—against her erstwhile employer in her Particularized Complaint.1
The plaintiff does not allege facts showing the required elements of a Title VII retaliation
claim, and her ADA claim for money damages against a state agency is barred by the Eleventh
Amendment.

Accordingly, as discussed in greater detail below, the Court will GRANT the

defendants' motion to dismiss.
I. MATERIAL FACTS

Coffee worked at the DJJ's Bon Air Juvenile Correctional Facility until her voluntary
resignation on June 27, 2013. (Am. Compl. K81.) The latter stages of Coffee's time there were

The plaintiff, Evalyn Coffee, has also named Major Kenneth Washington (the DJJ's chief of
security)—in his official capacity—as a defendant. A suit against a person in his official
capacity is actually a suit against the entity for which he works. See Brandon v. Holt, 469 U.S.
464, 471-72 (1985). Since the DJJ is a defendant, the Court will dismiss the official capacity
claims against Major Washington as superfluous. See Brissett v. Paul, 141 F.3d 1157, at *1 (4th
Cir. 1998) ("[Naming] the local governments that employed [the officials] and naming the local
officials in their official capacities was, therefore, redundant and unnecessary.").