Brock-Burchett v. McNew Fabrication Inc
This text of Brock-Burchett v. McNew Fabrication Inc (Brock-Burchett v. McNew Fabrication Inc) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION
DOROTHY BROCK-BURCHETT PLAINTIFF
No. 4:20-cv-374-DPM
MCNEW FABRICATION, INC. and JEFFREY MCNEW DEFENDANTS
ORDER Jeffrey McNew admitted in his answer that he and his corporation employed Brock-Burchett. Doc. 10 at § 23. He now moves to dismiss the claims against himself, arguing failure to state a claim based on his exclusively corporate role. Doc. 11; FED. R. Clv. P. 12(b)(6). Brock- Burchett’s co-employment claims are plausible. The federal and state statutes create a broad category of who qualifies as an “employer.” 29 US.C. §§ 203(a) & (d); ARK. CODE ANN. § 11-4-203(4)(A). Brock- Burchett has alleged McNew’s involvement with and authority over her employment with sufficient particulars to bring him within the statutes’ category. Wirtz v. Pure Ice Co., 322 F.2d 259, 262-63 (8th Cir. 1963). Motion, Doc. 11, denied.
So Ordered.
IV4n toll D.P. Marshall Jr. United States District Judge
22. September 2.02.0
-2-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Brock-Burchett v. McNew Fabrication Inc, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brock-burchett-v-mcnew-fabrication-inc-ared-2020.