Defendants also argue that Plaintiff’s sexual harassment and hostile work environment claims should be dismissed as untimely, that Plaintiff’s negligence claim is barred by the doctrine of res judicata, and that Plaintiff’s breach of contract claim is preempted by the D.C. Defendants argue that this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction because Plaintiff fails to establish that her claims involve a question of federal law. Pending before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). She also asserts a claim against DCPS for beaching an “express or implied employment contract,” by failing to protect Plaintiff from this alleged misconduct. Plaintiff brings claims against all Defendants for “sexual harassment” and “hostile work environment,” and negligence. She also claims that Defendant Wright threatened that she would lose her job if she pursued a complaint against a student who allegedly sexually assaulted her. Plaintiff alleges that while she was employed by DCPS as a Transition Specialist, she was sexually harassed by her supervisor, Defendant Wright. MEMORANDUM OPINION (December 14, 2021) Plaintiff Brije Smith brings this action against Defendants Eugene Wright, the District of Columbia Public Schools (“DCPS”), and the District of Columbia (the “District”). 20-3389 (CKK) EUGENE WRIGHT, et al., Defendants. 20 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BRIJE SMITH, Plaintiff, v.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |