From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McCue v. Loomis Fargo Company

United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
Jun 14, 2006
Case No. 05C1083 (E.D. Wis. Jun. 14, 2006)

Opinion

Case No. 05C1083.

June 14, 2006


DECISION AND ORDER


Plaintiff Thomas M. McCue brings this age discrimination claim against defendant Loomis Fargo Company, his former employer. Plaintiff also brings a supplemental state law claim alleging that defendant wrongfully discharged him for filing a worker's compensation claim. Before me now is defendant's motion to dismiss plaintiff's supplemental claim. Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), I may grant defendant's motion only if plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim that would entitle him to relief, Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957). In addressing the motion, I take all facts and reasonable inferences therefrom in the light most favorable to plaintiff. Bethlehem Steel Corp. v. Bush, 918 F.2d 1323, 1326 (7th Cir. 1990).

Defendant argues that I must grant its motion because Wisconsin law does not recognize a cause of action for wrongful discharge where an individual is fired for filing a worker's compensation claim. See Hoeller v. Eaton Corp., 149 F.3d 621, 625 (7th Cir. 1998); Brown v. Pick `n Save Food Stores, 138 F. Supp. 2d 1133, 1139-44 (E.D. Wis. 2001). Plaintiff agrees that these cases are on point but argues that "the time has come for the court to provide a common law remedy" for the wrong in question. (Pl.'s Br. at 4.) In Brown, I indicated that while the Wisconsin Supreme Court might provide such a remedy in the future and while there might be good arguments in favor of its doing so, based on the present state of the law it was inappropriate for me to predict that it would do so. I noted that federal courts are to be circumspect in expanding the law of a state beyond the boundaries established in the jurisprudence of the state. Id. at 1144. Since I decidedBrown, Wisconsin law has not changed. Thus, for the reasons stated in Brown, I decline to predict that Wisconsin courts will expand the state's wrongful discharge law to allow claims such as plaintiff's to proceed.

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that defendant's motion to dismiss plaintiff's supplemental state law claim is GRANTED.


Summaries of

McCue v. Loomis Fargo Company

United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
Jun 14, 2006
Case No. 05C1083 (E.D. Wis. Jun. 14, 2006)
Case details for

McCue v. Loomis Fargo Company

Case Details

Full title:THOMAS M. McCUE, Plaintiff, v. LOOMIS FARGO COMPANY, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin

Date published: Jun 14, 2006

Citations

Case No. 05C1083 (E.D. Wis. Jun. 14, 2006)

Citing Cases

Perry v. Cleaning Pros of Wis., Inc.

That is, there is no cause of action for wrongful discharge where the employee is fired for filing a worker's…