Rivers v. Federal Express Grounds, et al., No. 4:2014cv03439 - Document 67 (S.D. Tex. 2015)
Court Description: OPINION on Dismissal. (Signed by Judge Lynn N. Hughes) Parties notified. (ghassan, 4)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Rivers v. Federal Express Grounds, et al. Doc. 67 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS District Court United States Southern District of Texas ENTERED Robin Prince-Rivers, Plaintiff, versus Federal Express Grounds, et al., Defendants. § § § § § § § § § December 10, 2015 David J. Bradley, Clerk Civil Action H- I 4-34 39 Opinion on Dismissal I. Introduction. A woman was hired by a temporary staffing agency to work as a driver for a package- delivery service. She says that she was discriminated against because of her sex and race. Because she complained too late, her claims are barred by limitations. 2.. Background. Around November 20Ir, Robin Prince-Rivers was hired by Randstad Temporary Agency to work as a temporary driver for Federal Express Grounds. In this case, she incorrectly named "Rands tad Temporary Agency" and "Federal Express"as defendants; Randstad HR Solutions of Deleware, L.P., and FedEx Ground Package System, Inc, are their correct names. Randstad assigned her to Mike Gonzales's delivery route. She says that Gonzales and other drivers unduly criticiz;ed her work ethic, called her "small minded," and Randstad paid her less than other comparable employees. On November 8, 20I3, Rivers took leave from work. On October 3, 20I4, Rivers filed charges with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission against Randstad and Federal Express. She claimed that the companies paid her $I 2.63 per hour while her male, non-African American co-workers were paid $ I 3 .00 per hour or more. She says she was treated differently because of her race and sex, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of I964 and the Equal Pay Act of I963· On August 29, 20I4, and October I5, 20I4, the Commission notified her of her right to sue Federal Express and Randstad. Dockets.Justia.com Rivers also says her poor mental health inhibits her ability effectively to bring her claims. She says that Federal Express spied on her, ultimately causing anxiety that forced her to move from her home. OnJanuary 26,2015, the court held an initial conference - Rivers attended. For nearly one hour, the court discussed Rivers's claims against Federal Express and Randstad. Despite acknowledging the procedural deficiencies in her claims, Randstad agreed to discuss settlement. The court gave her one day to reflect on the value of her claims and Randstad's offer, and then it gave her three additional days. She refused to settle. 3. Federal Express. A plaintiff must sue within ninety days of receiving a right-to-sue letter from the Commission." Because that letter clearly describes this strict deadline, the warning is in bold and underlined, it applies equally to litigants with and without lawyers. Here, Rivers had ninety-one days to sue because of the Thanksgiving Holiday. Rivers filed suit against Federal Express ninety-four days after receiving her letter. Her claim is barred by limitations. Federal Express will be dismissed with prejudice. 4. Randstad. A discriminatory act occurs on the day that it happens. Z Texas requires a claimant to file a charge of discrimination with the Texas Workforce Commission and the Commission within 300 days of the discriminatory act. 3 If she not file, she loses her ability to recover. Rivers filed her charge against Randstad on October 3, 2014. In the charge she says the discrimination ended on November 8,2013' She also says she took leave from work on November 8,2013, 3 29 days elapsed from the latest possible day of discrimination to when she filed her charge. Her claims is barred by limitations. "42 U.S.c. § 2000 e-5(fj (I) (West). Z 3 National R.R. Passenger Corp. v. Morgan, 536 U.S. 101, 42 U.s.c. § 2000 e-5(e)(I) (West). lIO (2002). Rivers asks the court for special treatment because her poor mental health and mental impairments cause her to be confused. The court sympathiz;es with Rivers, but Rivers's vaguely asserted and unsubstantiated confusion does not warrant tolling limitations. 4 Randstad will be dismissed with prejudice. 5. Conclusion. Rivers waited too long to bring claims against Randstad and Federal Express. This wait forfeited her ability to recover. Randstand and Federal Express will be dismissed with prejudice. Signed on December 10,2.015, at Houston, Texas. --~~~§?~--~--------Lynn N. Hughes United States DistrictJudge 4See Vidal v. Chertoff, 2.93 App'x 32.5,32.9 (5th Cir. 2.008).
]]>
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.
