Coffee v. Department of Juvenile Justice et al, No. 3:2014cv00262 - Document 22 (E.D. Va. 2014)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge John A. Gibney, Jr on 7/18/14. Copy sent: Yes (tdai, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division EVALYN D. COFFEE, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 3:14-cv-262-JAG v. DEPARTMENT OF JUVENILE JUSTICE, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter comes before the Court on the defendants' motion to dismiss. (Dk. No. 28.) The plaintiff, a former correctional officer at Virginia's Department of Juvenile Justice, brings two counts a retaliation claim under Title VII, and a discrimination claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act against her erstwhile employer in her Particularized Complaint.1 The plaintiff does not allege facts showing the required elements of a Title VII retaliation claim, and her ADA claim for money damages against a state agency is barred by the Eleventh Amendment. Accordingly, as discussed in greater detail below, the Court will GRANT the defendants' motion to dismiss. I. MATERIAL FACTS Coffee worked at the DJJ's Bon Air Juvenile Correctional Facility until her voluntary resignation on June 27, 2013. (Am. Compl. K81.) The latter stages of Coffee's time there were The plaintiff, Evalyn Coffee, has also named Major Kenneth Washington (the DJJ's chief of security) in his official capacity as a defendant. A suit against a person in his official capacity is actually a suit against the entity for which he works. See Brandon v. Holt, 469 U.S. 464, 471-72 (1985). Since the DJJ is a defendant, the Court will dismiss the official capacity claims against Major Washington as superfluous. See Brissett v. Paul, 141 F.3d 1157, at *1 (4th Cir. 1998) ("[Naming] the local governments that employed [the officials] and naming the local officials in their official capacities was, therefore, redundant and unnecessary.").
]]>
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.
