Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Johnson v. Merchants Terminal Corp.

United States District Court, D. Maryland

June 17, 2016

MAURICE ANTHONY JOHNSON, Plaintiff,
v.
MERCHANTS TERMINAL CORPORATION, Defendant.

          MEMORANDUM

          Ellen Lipton Hollander United States District Judge

         On March 21, 2016, plaintiff Maurice Anthony Johnson, who is self-represented, filed an employment discrimination suit against his former employer. ECF 1. The caption names one defendant, Merchants Terminal Corporation. However, in the body of the Complaint, plaintiff identifies two additional defendants: Jeff Carden and Ken Johnson. Id. at 6-7. Plaintiff alleges that he suffered discrimination based on race, in the form of harassment and wrongful termination, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e, et seq. ("Title VII"). ECF 1 at 1-2. Plaintiff seeks,, inter alia, punitive damages; injunctive relief; back pay; reinstatement to his former position; costs; and attorney's fees.[1] Id. at 3-4, 11.

         On April 27, 2016, defendant, MTC Logistics, Inc. ("MTC"), [2] filed a "Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Title VII Individual-Capacity Claims against Defendants Ken Johnson and Jeff Carden" (ECF 6), supported by a memorandum of law. ECF 6-1 (collectively, the "Motion"). As MTC notes, ECF 6-1 at 1 n.2: "Carden and Johnson are not identified as Defendants on the Court's Civil Docket in this case, however, they are specifically named as Defendants by Plaintiff." Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(5) and 12(b)(6), MTC seeks the dismissal of plaintiffs "individual-capacity claims" against Johnson and Carden. ECF 6-1 at 1.

         On April 28, 2016, the Clerk sent a notice to plaintiff advising him of his right to respond. ECF 7.[3] Plaintiff has not responded to the Motion, and the time to do so has expired. See Local Rule 105.2.

         No hearing is necessary to resolve the Motion, See Local Rule 105.6. For the reasons that follow, I will grant the Motion.

         I. Factual and Procedural Background[4]

         Plaintiff, who is "Black" (ECF 1-2 at 1), alleges that he was terminated by MTC on March 11, 2014. ECF 1 at 2. In relevant part, plaintiff contends, id. at 2-3 ¶ 6:

6. The facts of my claim are: Was terminated unjustly and wrongfully three different times before last and final termination. White employees created and caused gross missconduct [sic] and is [sic] currently employed. Had been harassed, threatened, suspended, and terminated on numerous occasions.
Employer can[']t justify or explain honestly why I was terminated. Employer fabricated acts of gross misconduct to terminate. Employer did not honor the union contract. Harassment initially started Sept 2010 until March 11, 2014.

         In the Complaint, plaintiff also alleges that Jeff Carden, a "[p]lant manager, " "fabricated acts of conduct to discharge [plaintiff] without following union [sic] contract." Id. at 8. Plaintiff also alleges that Carden "terminated and harassed, suspended, threaten [sic] [him] on a regular basis." Id. at 10. Further, plaintiff alleges that Ken Johnson, the "President, " "allowed this action." Id. at 8.

         According to plaintiff, on June 20, 2014, he filed a Charge of Discrimination with the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). ECF 1 at 3 ¶ 9. Plaintiff has also submitted a letter to plaintiff from the EEOC's Baltimore Field Office, dated December 18, 2015. ECF 1-2 at 1-2. It says, in relevant part, id. at 1:

Having considered all the information provided by both you and [MTC], the Commission is unable to conclude that the information obtained establishes a violation of the statute as you've alleged. The evidence gathered shows [MTC] discharged you from employment as a result of information and observances it saw while you were working on March 11, 2014.

         The letter also said, id. at 2: "[Y]ou are being issued a Dismissal and Notice of Rights which affords you the opportunity to take this matter into Federal Court. You have the right to file a lawsuit against the employer within 90 days from the date you receive the Dismissal and Notice of Rights."

         Plaintiff maintains that he received a right-to-sue letter on December 23, 2015. ECF 1 at 3 ¶10. As noted, on March 21, 2016, ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.