Equity Funding, LLC v. McNeill
6:21-cv-00042
E.D. Okla.May 20, 2024Background
- Equity Funding, LLC (d/b/a Wilson Nursing Center) sued Vanessa C. McNeill, a former employee, alleging violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, misappropriation of trade secrets, and breach of fiduciary duties.
- McNeill responded with counterclaims against Equity Funding for tortious interference with her subsequent employment contract and slander after her employment at Pauls Valley Care Center (PVCC) was terminated.
- Equity Funding filed a motion to strike McNeill’s Answer and narrative under Rule 12(f) as "immaterial and scandalous," and moved to dismiss McNeill’s counterclaims under Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim.
- McNeill argued her narrative was relevant to motive and context supporting her counterclaims, especially tortious interference and slander, including the relationships and alleged conduct among the parties.
- The court analyzed whether McNeill’s factual allegations were relevant and sufficiently pled under the standards for striking immaterial/scandalous material and for stating a claim.
- The court denied Equity Funding’s motions, finding McNeill’s allegations relevant and sufficient to survive at this stage.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Strike Answer as Scandalous/Immaterial | McNeill’s narrative is immaterial and scandalous; should be struck | The narrative is relevant perspective and material to counterclaims | Denied; allegations are relevant and not scandalous |
| Dismiss Tortious Interference Claim | Insufficient factual support for intentional and improper interference | Provided adequate facts of intentional, improper interference leading to firing | Denied; facts plausibly allege claim |
| Dismiss Slander Claim | No defamatory statements plausibly alleged | Alleged factual statements about fitness and mental state causing harm | Denied; facts plausibly allege claim |
| Strike Identification of Non-Party | Naming Director of Nursing is prejudicial and irrelevant | Identification provides factual context | Denied; identification is not improper |
Key Cases Cited
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (plausibility standard for pleadings under Rule 12(b)(6))
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (facial plausibility standard for pleading sufficiency)
- Wilspec Techs., Inc. v. DunAn Holding Grp., 204 P.3d 69 (Okla. 2009) (elements for tortious interference under Oklahoma law)
- Starr v. Pearle Vision, Inc., 54 F.3d 1548 (10th Cir. 1995) (elements for slander claim under Oklahoma law)