Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Black v. Farmers Insurance, 2:18-cv-02529-MCE-DB. (2019)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20190627893 Visitors: 16
Filed: Jun. 25, 2019
Latest Update: Jun. 25, 2019
Summary: ORDER MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR. , District Judge . Plaintiff Lisa Black ("Plaintiff") is an insurance adjuster employed by Defendants Farmers Insurance, Farmers Insurance Exchange, and Farmers Group, Inc. (collectively "Farmers"). Plaintiff claims she was discriminated against on the basis of her gender when she was demoted by Farmers in March 2013 after failing to pass a certification exam. Plaintiff's operative Second Amended Complaint also alleges retaliation and failure to promote, all i
More

ORDER

Plaintiff Lisa Black ("Plaintiff") is an insurance adjuster employed by Defendants Farmers Insurance, Farmers Insurance Exchange, and Farmers Group, Inc. (collectively "Farmers"). Plaintiff claims she was discriminated against on the basis of her gender when she was demoted by Farmers in March 2013 after failing to pass a certification exam. Plaintiff's operative Second Amended Complaint also alleges retaliation and failure to promote, all in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 28 U.S.C. § 2000, et seq. In addition, Plaintiff asserts a common law state claim for breach of implied contract.

Presently before the Court is Farmers' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint for failure to state a viable claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Farmers alleges that Plaintiff's causes of action predicated on Title VII, as well as her claim for breach of implied contract, are all time-barred. Farmers goes on to allege that Plaintiff has not pleaded any viable breach of implied contract in any event. Given those shortcomings, Farmers asks the Court to grant its Motion without leave to amend.

On June 10, 2019, Plaintiff filed a Statement of Non-Opposition to Farmers' Motion (ECF No. 22). Given that non-opposition, and good cause appearing, Farmers' Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED, without further leave to amend.1 The matter having now been concluded in its entirety, the Clerk of Court is directed to close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. Having determined that oral argument was not of material assistance, the Court ordered this matter submitted on the briefs in accordance with E.D. Local Rule 230(g).
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer