Cabral v. Mass. Bay Transp. Auth., Civil Action No. 18-12404-NMG

CourtUnited States District Courts. 1st Circuit. United States District Courts. 1st Circuit. District of Massachusetts
Citation408 F.Supp.3d 17
Docket NumberCivil Action No. 18-12404-NMG
Parties Robert C. CABRAL, Sr., Plaintiff, v. MASSACHUSETTS BAY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY et al., Defendants.
Decision Date07 October 2019

408 F.Supp.3d 17

Robert C. CABRAL, Sr., Plaintiff,

Civil Action No. 18-12404-NMG

United States District Court, D. Massachusetts.

Signed October 7, 2019

408 F.Supp.3d 18

Robert C. Cabral, Sr., Quincy, MA, pro se.

Kavita M. Goyal, Emily L. Grossman, Rosen Law Offices, P.C., Andover, MA, Ryan E. Ferch, Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, Brian J. Rogal, Rogal & Donnellan, P.C., Norwood, MA, for Defendants.


GORTON, District Judge

Robert Cabral ("Mr. Cabral" or "plaintiff") brought several federal and state law claims against the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority ("the MBTA"), Boston Carmen's Union Local 589 ("the Union"), Union delegate Patrick Hogan and Union president James O'Brien (collectively, "defendants").1

I. Background

This action arises out of an incident wherein Mr. Cabral, who was at the time a full-time MBTA bus operator, abruptly applied the brakes to avoid a collision while driving an MBTA bus on his assigned route. A passenger was injured as a result. Following the incident, Mr. Cabral was required to submit to drug and alcohol testing and tested positive for marijuana use.

408 F.Supp.3d 19

Shortly thereafter, the MBTA convened a disciplinary hearing, suspended Mr. Cabral without pay for 70 days and recommended his discharge. Mr. Cabral submitted a grievance challenging his termination which was denied. He also contacted the Union to file a request for arbitration but the Union Board decided not to pursue arbitration on behalf of Mr. Cabral.

Mr. Cabral's complaint asserts claims of breach of contract, breach of the duty of fair representation and violations of the Labor Management Relations Act, Department of Transportation Regulations and the Fourth Amendment.

Defendants filed their respective motions to dismiss in December, 2018, (Docket Entry No. 9) and February, 2019, (Docket Entry No. 30)....

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • Foisie v. Worcester Polytechnic Inst.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (1st Circuit)
    • July 24, 2020
    ...Janet opposed the motion but, after briefing and oral argument, the 967 F.3d 35 district court dismissed the complaint. See Foisie, 408 F. Supp. 3d at 17. This timely appeal ensued.II. ANALYSISThe plaintiff attacks the district court's dismissal of her complaint primarily on two fronts. Fir......

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