Stultz v. Va. Dep't of Motor Vehicles

3 Citing cases

  1. Supinger v. Va. Dep't of Motor Vehicles

    Case No. 6:15-cv-00017 (W.D. Va. Jun. 2, 2016)

    However, in another related case involving some of the same actors and similar allegations - Stultz v. Commonwealth, No. 7:13-cv-589 - Chief Judge Conrad held that the plaintiff's allegations about his speech to the same legislators about some of the same topics was "sufficient to withstand review under Rule 12(b)(6)" despite the fact that the plaintiff had not included his precise statements or communications that were at issue. Stultz v. Commonwealth, No. 7:13-cv-589, 2015 WL 4648001, at *8 (W.D. Va. Aug. 5, 2015). Here, Plaintiff has included in his proposed amended complaint multiple emails containing the precise content and context of the speech that forms the basis of his claims.

  2. Supinger v. Commonwealth

    167 F. Supp. 3d 795 (W.D. Va. 2016)   Cited 14 times
    Holding that a transfer that required the plaintiff to complete a three-hour roundtrip daily commute, as opposed to the plaintiff's original 30-minute commute, constituted an adverse employment action

    April 29, 2015) (“[T]he disclosure of Plaintiff's DMV information to the Capitol Police is a ‘permissible use’ under the [DPPA].”); Stultz v. Virginia Dept. of Motor Vehicles , No. 7:13CV00589, 2015 WL 4648001, at *10 (W.D.Va. Aug. 5, 2015) (“[Plaintiff] has not sufficiently alleged that his DMV information was impermissibly disclosed to the Capitol Police.”). Accordingly, Supinger has failed to adequately plead a violation under the DPPA.

  3. Supinger v. Virginia

    CASE NO. 6:15-cv-00017 (W.D. Va. Dec. 1, 2015)   Cited 2 times

    In this case, a state court has addressed the issue. Moreover, as Defendants have pointed out, courts in the Eastern and Western Districts of Virginia routinely exercise supplemental jurisdiction over claims under Section 18.2-15.5. See, e.g., Stultz v. Virginia Dept. of Motor Vehicles, C.A. No. 7:13CV00589, 2015 WL 4648001 (W.D. Va. Aug. 5, 2015); Global Policy Partners, LLC v. Yessin, 686 F. Supp. 2d 631 (E.D. Va. 2009). Finally, Plaintiff does not seriously dispute that his state law claims are insufficiently related to his federal claims.