Lauer v. Petit Jean Electric Cooperative Corporation

E.D. Arkansas

Lauer v. Petit Jean Electric Cooperative Corporation

DecidedJanuary 11, 2023

Docket4:22-cv-00777

StatusUnknown

This text of Lauer v. Petit Jean Electric Cooperative Corporation (Lauer v. Petit Jean Electric Cooperative Corporation) 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.

Bluebook

Lauer v. Petit Jean Electric Cooperative Corporation, (E.D. Ark. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION

JANET LAUER PLAINTIFF

V. No. 4:22-cv-777-DPM

PETIT JEAN ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE CORPORATION and MICHAEL KIRKLAND DEFENDANTS

ORDER Lauer has worked at Petit Jean for more than forty years. She alleges that Kirkland, Petit Jean’s CEO, made several offensive statements about her age and had other employees record conversations with her and monitor her while she was at work. She says her pay was cut and she was demoted. She brings a claim for age discrimination under the ADEA against Petit Jean and an outrage claim against Petit Jean and Kirkland. Petit Jean and Kirkland have moved to dismiss the outrage claim and Kirkland as a defendant. Taking all the factual allegations in the complaint as true, Lauer has not shown that what Kirkland did was extreme and outrageous beyond all possible bounds of decency. Faulkner v. Arkansas Children’s Hospital, 347 Ark. 941, 957-58, 69 S.W.3d 393, 403-04 (2002). The conduct and statements alleged are offensive. But they don’t match or exceed more egregious behavior that Arkansas courts have found insufficient

to state an outrage claim. Compare, e.g., Smith v. American Greetings Corp., 304 Ark. 596, 602, 804 S.W.2d 683, 686 (1991) (no outrage claim where shift leader hit employee after a dispute and employee was later fired); Sterling v. Upjohn Healthcare Services, Inc., 299 Ark. 278, 279-80, 772 5.W.2d 329, 330 (1989) (no outrage claim where employer accused employee of being drunk and lying on his job application and instructed other workers to monitor the employee and report back). And Lauer hasn’t shown that Kirkland’s behavior caused her emotional distress so severe that no reasonable person could be expected to endure it. Faulkner, 347 Ark. at 957, 69 S.W.3d at 403-04.

Motion for partial dismissal, Doc. 3, granted. Lauer’s outrage claim is dismissed without prejudice. Kirkland is also dismissed without prejudice. So Ordered. SPY} Holl D.P. Marshall Jr. United States District Judge if fomuorx DORS

-2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION

JANET LAUER PLAINTIFF

V. No. 4:22-cv-777-DPM

PETIT JEAN ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE CORPORATION and MICHAEL KIRKLAND DEFENDANTS

ORDER Lauer has worked at Petit Jean for more than forty years. She alleges that Kirkland, Petit Jean’s CEO, made several offensive statements about her age and had other employees record conversations with her and monitor her while she was at work. She says her pay was cut and she was demoted. She brings a claim for age discrimination under the ADEA against Petit Jean and an outrage claim against Petit Jean and Kirkland. Petit Jean and Kirkland have moved to dismiss the outrage claim and Kirkland as a defendant. Taking all the factual allegations in the complaint as true, Lauer has not shown that what Kirkland did was extreme and outrageous beyond all possible bounds of decency. Faulkner v. Arkansas Children’s Hospital, 347 Ark. 941, 957-58, 69 S.W.3d 393, 403-04 (2002). The conduct and statements alleged are offensive. But they don’t match or exceed more egregious behavior that Arkansas courts have found insufficient

to state an outrage claim. Compare, e.g., Smith v. American Greetings Corp., 304 Ark. 596, 602, 804 S.W.2d 683, 686 (1991) (no outrage claim where shift leader hit employee after a dispute and employee was later fired); Sterling v. Upjohn Healthcare Services, Inc., 299 Ark. 278, 279-80, 772 5.W.2d 329, 330 (1989) (no outrage claim where employer accused employee of being drunk and lying on his job application and instructed other workers to monitor the employee and report back). And Lauer hasn’t shown that Kirkland’s behavior caused her emotional distress so severe that no reasonable person could be expected to endure it. Faulkner, 347 Ark. at 957, 69 S.W.3d at 403-04.

Motion for partial dismissal, Doc. 3, granted. Lauer’s outrage claim is dismissed without prejudice. Kirkland is also dismissed without prejudice. So Ordered. SPY} Holl D.P. Marshall Jr. United States District Judge if fomuorx DORS

-2-

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Lauer v. Petit Jean Electric Cooperative Corporation, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lauer-v-petit-jean-electric-cooperative-corporation-ared-2023.

Opinion

V. No. 4:22-cv-777-DPM

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack