Richardson v. Axion Logistics, L.L.C., No. 14-30306 (5th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CaseJustin Richardson appealed the district court's dismissal of his first amended complaint, which alleged that Axion Logistics, L.L.C. terminated his employment in violation of Louisiana's whistleblower statute. Richardson was briefly employed by Axion from February 7, 2012, to May 21, 2012. Axion promoted him to general manager of the company's Louisiana operations shortly after he was hired. While serving as general manager, Richardson became aware that two Axion employees, Jimmy Hall and Don Ward, were fraudulently billing Dow Chemical, and Axion client, for mileage reimbursement. Richardson first learned of the fraudulent billing when Andy Wheat, whom Hall had told about these billing practices, showed Richardson the discrepant time sheets. Richardson reported the timesheet manipulations up the chain of command. Along with Wheat, he called Axion's former president, Steve Seymour, to report the over-billing. Seymour had previously tried to fire Hall, in part for his fraudulent billing, but Gary Grant, Axion's CEO, would not allow it. On May 2, 2012, Richardson and Wheat met with Grant. Grant instructed them to submit a written repor, which they did via e-mail later that same day. The following week, Richardson attended a dinner with Axion management, who spent much of the evening criticizing Richardson's job performance and qualifications. About a week later, Seymour informed Richardson that he had not made a good impression with Grant and the rest of Axion's management. Seymour terminated Richardson's employment on the stated ground that he “was not a good fit” for the company. Axion moved to dismiss Richardson's complaint under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and Richardson amended his complaint. Axion again moved to dismiss, and the district court granted the motion, entering a dismissal with prejudice. Richardson appealed to the Fifth Circuit. Because the complaint stated a plausible claim for relief, the Fifth Circuit reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
The court issued a subsequent related opinion or order on March 23, 2015.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.