Williams v. AM Lapomarda et al, No. 3:2019cv00631 - Document 37 (E.D. Va. 2020)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge David J. Novak on 7/6/2020. (jsmi, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Williams v. AM Lapomarda et al Doc. 37 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTEN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division LAKIA WILLIAMS, Plaintif, V. Civil No. 3: l 9cv63 l (DJN) AM LAPOMARDA, et al., Deendnt. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintif Lakia Williams ("Plaintif') brings this action against A.M. Lapomarda, Inc. ("Lapomarda") and Ann Marie Fulcher ("Fulcher") (collectively the "Deendants"), alleging violations of 42 U.S.C. § 2000a et seq., 42 U.S.C. § 1981, 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3) and Va. Code § 8.01-42.1, as well as a common law claim of intentional inliction of emotional distress ("IIED"). This matter comes beore the Court on the Deendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintifs First Amended Complaint Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (ECF No. 28). For the ollowing reasons, the Court hereby GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Deendants' Motion (ECF No. 28). I. BACKGROUND In considering a motion to dismiss or ailure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), the Court will accept a plaintiffs allegations as true and view the acts in a light most avorable to the plaintif. Mylan Labs., Inc. v. Matari, 1 F.2d I 130, 1134 (4th Cir. 1993). However, the Court need not accept the plaintiffs legal conclusions. Ashcrot v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). Based on this standard, the Court accepts the ollowing acts. Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
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.
