266 F. Supp. 3d 1213
C.D. Cal.2017Background
- Plaintiff Genevieve Duronslet, a transgender minor (biologically male, identifies as female), was detained by Los Angeles County DCFS in October 2015 and alleges DCFS forced her to use male restrooms and sleep on the “boy’s side.”
- Plaintiff alleges DCFS acted pursuant to a County policy or custom of treating detainees according to birth-assigned sex rather than gender identity.
- Plaintiff sued the County of Los Angeles under: (1) California Unruh Civil Rights Act; (2) intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED); (3) federal Due Process Clause (Monell claim); and (4) federal Equal Protection Clause.
- The County moved to dismiss all claims under Rule 12(b)(6). The court granted the motion in part and denied it in part, allowing Plaintiff 14 days to file an amended complaint.
- Court dismissed Unruh and IIED claims for failure to plausibly plead necessary elements (intentional discrimination; knowledge and severe emotional distress), but granted leave to amend.
- Court denied dismissal as to the federal Due Process Monell claim (policy/practice pleaded sufficiently on information and belief) and allowed the Equal Protection claim to proceed, finding it premature to decide the level of scrutiny.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unruh Act (intentional discrimination) | Duronslet alleges County knew or should have known she was transgender and enforced a birth-sex policy | County: complaint lacks facts supporting discriminatory intent or that County knew of plaintiff’s transgender status | Dismissed with leave to amend (intentional discrimination not plausibly pleaded) |
| IIED (state common-law) | Forcing a transgender minor to use facilities inconsistent with her gender identity was extreme, outrageous, intended/reckless and caused severe distress | County: public entity liability limited; no facts showing extreme/outrageous conduct, intent/recklessness, or severe distress | Dismissed with leave to amend (deficiencies in statutory pleading and IIED elements) |
| Due Process (Monell policy/custom) | County has policy/custom treating detainees by birth-assigned sex; allegation pled on information and belief | County: insufficient factual basis to show a policy, practice, or custom | Denied as to dismissal — Monell claim plausibly pleaded at pleading stage; discovery appropriate |
| Equal Protection (level of scrutiny & rationality) | Plaintiff argues heightened scrutiny or at least pleads facts showing lack of rational basis | County: transgender discrimination merits rational-basis review and is rationally related to governmental interests | Denied as to dismissal — premature to decide scrutiny; plaintiff plausibly alleged claim and need not negate defenses at pleading stage |
Key Cases Cited
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (pleading standards; conclusory allegations insufficient)
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (plausibility standard for complaints)
- Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs. of City of N.Y., 436 U.S. 668 (municipal liability under § 1983 requires policy/custom)
- Connick v. Thompson, 563 U.S. 51 (official municipal policy includes persistent practices with force of law)
- Hughes v. Pair, 46 Cal.4th 1035 (elements and threshold for IIED; severe emotional distress standard)
- City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Ctr., 473 U.S. 432 (equal protection levels of scrutiny framework)
- Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U.S. 228 (sex discrimination includes failure to conform to gender norms)
- Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696 (12(b)(6) dismissal standard)
- Starr v. Baca, 652 F.3d 1202 (Monell pleading and moving past pleading stage)