Opinion
CIVIL NO. 09-1545 (JP).
November 13, 2009
OPINION AND ORDER
Before the Court is Third-Party Defendant Americorps Vista's ("Americorps") motion to dismiss ( No. 9) the third-party complaint against it. Said motion is unopposed. Third-Party Plaintiffs Asociación Mayagüezana de Personas con Impedimentos, Esther Caro-Morales, and Esther Vega brought this lawsuit against Americorps requesting money damages. Third-Party Defendant Americorps moves to dismiss the Third-Party complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1). For the reasons stated herein, Third-Party Defendant's motion to dismiss is hereby GRANTED.
I. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Frances Herrera ("Herrera") is a licensed social worker. She alleges that, on August 24, 2007, she was hired by Defendant Asociación Mayagüezana de Personas con Impedimentos ("Asociación Mayagüezana"). Plaintiff alleges that when she started work she was assigned to tasks that were not appropriate for a social worker. Also, during her time at Asociación Mayagüezana, Plaintiff alleges that Defendants Esther Caro Morales and Esther Vega treated her in a degrading manner, including making disparaging comments and mocking her.
Plaintiff Herrera also alleges that she had an agreement with Asociación Mayagüezana which stated that when a position for social worker became open it would be offered to Plaintiff. When a social worker position became open, Plaintiff alleges that it was not offered to her, but instead Defendants asker her if she knew a social worker she could recommend for the position. As a result of Defendants' treatment of Plaintiff, she resigned on October 23, 2007.
After resigning from her job, Plaintiff filed a complaint against Defendants Asociación Mayagüezana, Esther Caro-Morales, and Esther Vega ("Defendants" or "Third-Party Plaintiffs") in the Puerto Rico Court of First Instance of Mayagüez. Third-Party Plaintiffs then filed a Third-Party complaint in the same Puerto Rico Court of First Instance against Third-Party Defendants Americorps Vista ("Americorps") and MAPFRE. In said third-party complaint, Third-Party Plaintiffs allege that Americorps is the organization that recruited Plaintiff Herrera as a volunteer and that therefore they should be held liable for any damages awarded to Plaintiff Herrera. Americorps is a federally conducted program administered by the Corporation for National and Community Service ("CNSC"). CNSC is a wholly owned federal corporation.
On June 16, 2009, Third-Party Defendant Americorps filed a notice of removal of the Third-Party complaint filed against it in the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico. Americorps then filed the instant motion to dismiss.
II. LEGAL STANDARD FOR A MOTION TO DISMISS
III. ANALYSIS
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly127 S. Ct. 19551969Id. Twombly Conley v. Gibson 355 U.S. 4145-46Rodríguez-Ortiz v. Margo Caribe, Inc.490 F.3d 9294-95Twombly127 S. Ct. at 1969Rumford Pharmacy, Inc. v. City of East Providence970 F.2d 996997
A. Lack of Subject-Matter Jurisdiction
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), a defendant may move to dismiss the complaint due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction of the Court to hear the action. The Federal Torts Claims Act ("FTCA"), 28 U.S.C. §§ 2671 et seq., provides the mechanism through which individuals can sue the United States government for the tortious conduct of its employees. Lazarini v. United States, 898 F. Supp. 40, 44 (D.P.R. 1995) (Pieras, J.). It is the exclusive remedy for actions for money damages, injury, loss of property or death caused by negligent or wrongful actions of federal government employees during the scope of their employment. Lora-Rivera v. Drug Enforcement Admin. Department of Justice, 800 F. Supp. 1049, 1050 (D.P.R. 1992). Under the FTCA, only the United States may be sued eo nomine. Marcucci de Mangual v. United States, 131 F. Supp. 2d 263, 265 (D.P.R. 2001) (Pieras, J.).
In the instant Third-Party complaint, Third-Party Plaintiffs bring an action for money damages against the Third-Party Defendant Americorps. Americorps is a program run by CNSC, which is a wholly owned federal corporation. Under the FTCA, such a suit can only proceed against the United States government itself, and not against CNSC or Americorps. See Potter v. Ledesma, 541 F. Supp. 2d 463, 466 (D.P.R. 2008) (explaining how suits pursuant to FTCA must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction if they are not brought against the United States, but are instead brought against a federal agency). Because the United States was not included in the Third-Party complaint, the Third-Party complaint against Americorps cannot go forward.
At this juncture, the Court will dismiss the allegations in the Third-Party complaint against Americorps. Said allegations allowed Third-Party Defendant to remove the case to Federal Court. As such, there are no other claims pending before this Court which give it jurisdiction. In view of the policies strongly favoring remand, such as comity and judicial economy, the Court in its discretion remands the instant case to be adjudicated in the proper forum, the courts of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. See, e.g., Acosta Oliveras v. Pittsburgh Corning Corp., 36 F. Supp. 2d 443, 445 (D.P.R. 1999).
IV. CONCLUSION
Thus, the Court holds that the Third-Party complaint against Americorps is dismissed with prejudice. Also, the Court ORDERS that the case be remanded to the courts of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. In accordance with this Opinion and Order, the Court will enter a separate judgment.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
In San Juan, Puerto Rico.