Find Laws Find Lawyers Free Legal Forms USA State Laws
Laws-info.com » Cases » Maryland » the District of Maryland » 2005 » Jordan v. Alternative Resources Corporation, et al. (Memo)
Jordan v. Alternative Resources Corporation, et al. (Memo)
State: Maryland
Court: Maryland District Court
Case Date: 03/30/2005
Preview:IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND : ROBERT L. JORDAN : v. : Civil Action No. DKC 2004-1091 : ALTERNATIVE RESOURCES CORPORATION, et al. : MEMORANDUM OPINION Presently pending and ready for resolution in this case are (1) the motion of Plaintiff Robert L. Jordan for leave to amend his complaint pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a) (paper no. 23, hereinafter "Am. Compl."), and (2) the motion of Defendant International Business Machines, Inc. ("IBM"), joined by

Defendant Alternative Resources Corp. ("ARC"), to dismiss the original complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) (paper no. 6). The issues are fully briefed and the court now rules

pursuant to Local Rule 105.6, no further hearing being deemed necessary. For the reasons that follow, the court denies

Plaintiff's motion for leave to amend, in part with prejudice and in part without prejudice to renewal, and grants Defendants' motion to dismiss. I. Background Given the procedural posture of this case, it is logical and more efficient to examine Plaintiff's proposed amended

complaint, rather than the original complaint.

Plaintiff, in

his proposed amended complaint, alleges the following facts. Plaintiff, an African-American, was jointly employed by

Defendants Alternative Resources Corp. ("ARC") and International Business Machines Corp. ("IBM"). ARC provides information

technology management and staffing management services to IBM. Plaintiff technician. worked for ARC at IBM's office as a network

IBM exercised control over Plaintiff's day-to-day

employment at its office in Gaithersburg, Maryland. On October 23, 2002, Plaintiff and a co-worker employed by IBM, Jay Farjah, were at their workplace watching a television report about the capture of two African-Americans suspected of multiple sniper-style shootings. Farjah said, in Plaintiff's

presence: "They should put those two black monkeys in a cage with a bunch of black apes and let the apes fuck them."

Offended, Plaintiff related the remark to several co-workers. At least two co-workers told Plaintiff that they had heard Farjah make similar offensive comments many times before. Believing that Farjah's remark gave rise or would give rise to a hostile work environment, Plaintiff reported the incident to two of his IBM managers, Mary Ellen Gillard (his direct supervisor) and C. J. Huang (another supervisor), and requested that IBM tell Farjah not to make such comments. The managers

asked Plaintiff to submit the offensive comment in writing, 2

which he did.

Huang expressed skepticism about Plaintiff's

complaint, asked whether Plaintiff had considered the impact his incident report might have on Farjah, and suggested that Farjah might have been joking. Plaintiff also reported the incident to

an ARC manager, Sheri Mathers. Later, Gillard told Plaintiff that Farjah denied making the comment as Plaintiff reported it, but admitted saying "they should put those two monkeys in a cage." Plaintiff replied that

he wanted to raise his complaint with IBM's site manager, Ron Thompson. Immediately after the incident and complaints, Plaintiff was directed by Gillard, without explanation, to change his

reporting time from 6:30 AM to 9:00 AM, despite previously having been approved for a 6:30 AM start time so that he could finish work early enough to pick up his son after school. Gillard also began assigning more work to him. Later, Huang

made a crude, derogatory remark and gesture to Plaintiff at an office party, witnessed by co-workers. On November 21, 2002, Mathers fired Plaintiff, stating that he was "disruptive," that his position "had come to an end," and that the people at IBM "don't like you and you don't like them." On February 5, 2004, Plaintiff filed a complaint against Defendants in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County, alleging that Defendants fired him in retaliation for having reported 3

Farjah's offensive remark.

The complaint asserted claims of

retaliation against both defendants pursuant to
Download Jordan v. Alternative Resources Corporation, et al. (Memo).pdf

Maryland Law

Maryland State Laws
Maryland Court
Maryland Tax
Maryland Labor Laws
Maryland Agencies

Comments

Tips