Cabral v. Mass. Bay Transp. Auth., Civil Action No. 18-12404-NMG
| Court | United States District Courts. 1st Circuit. United States District Courts. 1st Circuit. District of Massachusetts |
| Citation | 408 F.Supp.3d 17 |
| Docket Number | Civil Action No. 18-12404-NMG |
| Parties | Robert C. CABRAL, Sr., Plaintiff, v. MASSACHUSETTS BAY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY et al., Defendants. |
| Decision Date | 07 October 2019 |
408 F.Supp.3d 17
Robert C. CABRAL, Sr., Plaintiff,
v.
MASSACHUSETTS BAY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY et al., Defendants.
Civil Action No. 18-12404-NMG
United States District Court, D. Massachusetts.
Signed October 7, 2019
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.
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
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.
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
-
Foisie v. Worcester Polytechnic Inst.
...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......