Kerckhoff v. Kerckhoff, 73 C 649(4).

Citation369 F. Supp. 1165
Decision Date14 January 1974
Docket NumberNo. 73 C 649(4).,73 C 649(4).
PartiesWilliam Daniel KERCKHOFF, Plaintiff, v. Richard D. KERCKHOFF, an Individual, et al., Defendants.
CourtUnited States District Courts. 8th Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of Missouri)

Harry H. Craig and Clyde E. Craig, Wiley, Craig, Armbruster & Wilburn, St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiff.

E. C. Hartman, St. Louis, Mo., for defendants Richard D. Kerckhoff, Kenneth Richard Kerckhoff, and Pevely Dairy Co.; J. Leonard Schermer, St. Louis, Mo., Co-counsel.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

NANGLE, District Judge.

This action is before the Court upon the motion of the defendants to dismiss and upon the motion of the plaintiff for leave to file an amended complaint.

This is an action wherein plaintiff alleges that his employment was terminated in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981.

Defendants move to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted. The Court will consider this a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The ground for this motion is plaintiff's failure to allege racial discrimination. In his brief plaintiff argues that the Reconstruction period civil rights legislation, including § 1981, are not only applicable to claims of racial discrimination. The Court disagrees with plaintiff with respect to § 1981. Such is limited to claims of racial discrimination. Brady v. Bristol-Meyers, Inc., 459 F.2d 621, 623 (8th Cir. 1972). The original complaint will be dismissed.

Plaintiff seeks leave to file an amended complaint that has been proffered to the Court. Therein he broadens his allegations to include the claim that his employment was terminated in retaliation for filing a certain will contest suit in the Missouri state courts. Plaintiff claims that 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1982, and 1985(2) and (3) are thereby violated. Although plaintiff makes conclusory allegations in the language of the cited statutes, he alleges no facts which indicate either a claim of racial discrimination or any violation of equal protection of the laws. No claim is found of "racial, or perhaps otherwise class based, invidiously discriminatory animus behind the defendants' action". Griffin v. Breckenridge, 403 U.S. 88, at 102, 91 S.Ct. 1790, 29 L.Ed.2d 538 (1971). The Court will deny leave to file the amended complaint.

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Hahn v. Sargent, Civ. A. No. 74-1908-T.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 1st Circuit. United States District Courts. 1st Circuit. District of Massachusetts
    • January 10, 1975
    ...C.1972)) and that racial or class-based discrimination is a condition precedent to invoking either provision. Kerckhoff v. Kerckhoff, 369 F.Supp. 1165, 1166 (E.D.Mo.1974); McIntosh v. Garofalo, 367 F.Supp. 501, 505 (W.D.Pa.1973); Boulware v. Battaglia, 327 F.Supp. 368, 371 (D.Del.1971); Kit......
  • Stern v. U.S. Gypsum, Inc., 76-1070
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • January 12, 1977
    ...445 (D.Mass.1975), aff'd, 523 F.2d 461 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 425 U.S. 904, 96 S.Ct. 1495, 47 L.Ed.2d 754 (1976); Kerckhoff v. Kerckhoff, 369 F.Supp. 1165 (E.D.Mo.1974); McIntosh v. Garofalo, 367 F.Supp. 501 (W.D.Pa.1973); Johnston v. National Broadcasting Company, Inc., 356 F.Supp. 904 ......
  • Phillips v. Fisher, 77-4145.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 10th Circuit. United States District Courts. 10th Circuit. District of Kansas
    • October 12, 1977
    ...no facts which indicate either a claim of racial discrimination or any violation of equal protection of the laws." Kerckhoff v. Kerckhoff, 369 F.Supp. 1165, 1166 (E.D.Mo.1974). The same questions which we asked in Steele may be asked with some force here. Is the "right" to have your furnitu......
  • Jones v. United States, LR-75-C-141.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. United States State District Court of Eastern District of Arkansas
    • August 27, 1975
    ...under all of § 1985(2). The following courts have so held: Hahn v. Sargent, 388 F. Supp. 445 (U.S.D.C.Mass.1975); Kerckhoff v. Kerckhoff, 369 F.Supp. 1165 (U.S.D.C.Mo.1974); Johnston v. National Broadcasting Co., Inc., 356 F. Supp. 904 (U.S.D.C.E.D.N.Y.1973); McIntosh v. Garofalo, 367 F.Sup......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT