From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Singleton v. Pittsburgh Bd. of Educ.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Jul 1, 2013
Civil Action No. 11-1431 (W.D. Pa. Jul. 1, 2013)

Summary

holding compensatory damages unavailable from defendants sued in their official capacities

Summary of this case from Sarvey v. Wetzel

Opinion

Civil Action No. 11-1431

07-01-2013

GERALD SINGLETON, Plaintiff, v. PITTSBURGH BOARD OF EDUCATION, et. al., Defendants.


Judge Cathy Bissoon

Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan


MEMORANDUM ORDER

This case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan for pretrial proceedings in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(l)(A) and (B), and Rules 72.C and 72.D of the Local Rules for Magistrates.

On May 24, 2013, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 89) recommending that Defendants' Pittsburgh Public School District, Dante Borgini, Latisha Cassidy McClelland, Kenneth Scott, Margaret Seig and Jody Spolar's motion to dismiss (Doc. 77) be granted with prejudice as to all claims asserted in Plaintiff's amended complaint (Doc. 73), except for Plaintiff's claims for disparate treatment and hostile work environment, which the Magistrate Judge recommended be dismissed without prejudice.

As noted by the Magistrate Judge, in his amended complaint, Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, appears to raise a due process violation claim under the Fourteenth Amendment regarding his termination, as well as a claim that Defendants conspired to deprive him of his due process rights. And although not specifically pled, Plaintiff also sets forth allegations suggesting claims for hostile work environment and disparate treatment against Defendant Pittsburgh Public School District as well as a defamation claim against Defendant Robert Fadzen.

Furthermore, the Magistrate Judge recommended that Defendant Robert Fadzen's motion to dismiss (Doc. 75) be granted as to all claims asserted in Plaintiff's amended complaint, except for Plaintiff's state law claim for defamation. The Magistrate Judge recommended that the Court refrain from exercising supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff's defamation claim, and dismiss the claim without prejudice, allowing Plaintiff to, if he so desires, file the claim in state court.

Service of the Report and Recommendation was made on the parties, Plaintiff timely filed Objections (Doc. 90) and Defendants filed a Response (Doc. 91).

After a de novo review of the pleadings and documents in the case, together with the Report and Recommendation, Objections thereto and Response, it is hereby ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of May 24, 2013 is adopted as the opinion of the Court.

IT IS ORDERED that Defendants' Pittsburgh Public School District, Dante Borgini, Latisha Cassidy McClelland, Kenneth Scott, Margaret Seig and Jody Spolar's motion to dismiss (Doc. 77) is granted with prejudice as to all claims, except for Plaintiff's claims for disparate treatment and hostile work environment.

As noted by the Magistrate Judge, although not formally pled, the allegations contained in Plaintiff's amended complaint (Doc. 73) suggest Plaintiff may be attempting to assert Title VII claims for hostile work environment and/or disparate treatment based on race. It is not clear, however, whether Plaintiff exhausted his administrative remedies before the EEOC. Therefore, to the extent asserted, Plaintiff's claims for disparate treatment and hostile work environment are dismissed without prejudice. If Plaintiff has exhausted his administrative remedies before the EEOC, Plaintiff's second amended complaint, if filed, should set forth sufficient facts to state a plausible disparate treatment and/or hostile work environment claim against the School District, including facts that demonstrate he exhausted his administrative remedies.

Plaintiff is hereby granted leave to file a second amended complaint against Defendant Pittsburgh Public School District regarding any hostile work environment and/or disparate treatment claim no later than July 22, 2013.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Robert Fadzen's motion to dismiss (Doc. 75) is granted and all claims, except for the defamation claim, are dismissed with prejudice. The Court will refrain from exercising supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff's defamation claim, and dismiss the claim without prejudice.

____________________

Cathy Bissoon

United States District Judge
cc: All attorneys of record (via CM/ECF e-mail).


Summaries of

Singleton v. Pittsburgh Bd. of Educ.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Jul 1, 2013
Civil Action No. 11-1431 (W.D. Pa. Jul. 1, 2013)

holding compensatory damages unavailable from defendants sued in their official capacities

Summary of this case from Sarvey v. Wetzel
Case details for

Singleton v. Pittsburgh Bd. of Educ.

Case Details

Full title:GERALD SINGLETON, Plaintiff, v. PITTSBURGH BOARD OF EDUCATION, et. al.…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Date published: Jul 1, 2013

Citations

Civil Action No. 11-1431 (W.D. Pa. Jul. 1, 2013)

Citing Cases

Sarvey v. Wetzel

Defendants sued in their official capacities are immune from claims for monetary damages under the Eleventh…