Bardwell v. Shoney's Rest., CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:18-CV-31-GNS

• Court: United States District Courts. 6th Circuit. United States District Court of Western District of Kentucky
• Writing for the Court: Greg N. Stivers, Judge United States District Court
• Parties: MARK JEFFERY BARDWELL PLAINTIFF v. SHONEY'S RESTAURANT et al. DEFENDANTS
• Decision Date: 05 April 2018
• Docket Number: CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:18-CV-31-GNS

MARK JEFFERY BARDWELL PLAINTIFF
v.
SHONEY'S RESTAURANT et al. DEFENDANTS

CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:18-CV-31-GNS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY AT PADUCAH

April 5, 2018

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Plaintiff Mark Jeffery Bardwell initiated this pro se employment discrimination action. Because Plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis, this Court must review the complaint and amended complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). For the reasons that follow, the action will be dismissed in part and allowed to proceed in part.

I.

Plaintiff filed a letter which the Court construed as a complaint for employment discrimination against Shoney's Restaurant (DN 1). At the Court's direction, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on a Court-supplied employment discrimination form (DN 5). In his amended complaint, Plaintiff indicates that he is bringing suit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-2000e-17, and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12112-12117. Plaintiff also names two additional Defendants in his amended complaint - Oscar Parker, whom Plaintiff identifies as the owner of Shoney's in Hopkinsville, Kentucky; and Tony Offett, whom Plaintiff identifies as the assistant manager of Shoney's in Hopkinsville, Kentucky. Plaintiff has filed a right-to-sue letter from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (DN 4). He seeks monetary damages in this action.

Page 2

II.

On review under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), a district court must dismiss a case at any time if it determines that the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B); McGore v. Wrigglesworth, 114 F.3d 601, 608-09 (6th Cir. 1997), overruled on other grounds by Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199 (2007).

In order to survive dismissal for failure to state a claim, "a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.'" Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). "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. (citing Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556). "[A] district court must (1) view the complaint in the light most favorable to the plaintiff...