Issa v. Delaware State University, 268 F. Supp. 3d 624

Jahi Issa, an African-American assistant professor at Delaware State University (DSU), was denied promotion in 2010 and 2011 after favorable committee recommendations; he alleges racial discrimination and ongoing harassment.
In March 2012 Issa participated in a campus protest, was confronted by DSU police, transported to a hospital, arrested, and charged with four misdemeanors; criminal charges were later dismissed, nolle prossed, or resulted in a hung jury and dismissal.
DSU placed Issa on paid administrative leave, issued a terminal appointment for 2012–13, and later pursued discharge purportedly in violation of the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA).
Issa filed suit asserting federal and state claims including § 1983 malicious prosecution, false arrest/imprisonment, ADA discrimination, breach of contract, defamation, Title VII claims, tortious interference, Monell, due process and retaliation; defendants moved to dismiss.
The Court granted reconsideration of its prior Eleventh Amendment ruling (vacating dismissal on sovereign immunity grounds), dismissed several claims with prejudice (including malicious prosecution, conspiracy, employment discrimination, tortious interference, Monell), dismissed some counts without prejudice (ADA, Title VII counts) and otherwise denied dismissal on claims like false arrest, defamation, breach of contract, due process, and retaliation.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity	Rogers and state-law indicators show DSU waived immunity; Fitchik factors weigh against immunity	DSU is a state entity entitled to Eleventh Amendment protection	Court vacated prior dismissal; immunity undecided on present record (defendants may renew defense)
§ 1983 Malicious prosecution	Dismissals/nolle prosses and final dismissal indicate favorable termination and lack of probable cause; discovery needed	Dismissals do not necessarily indicate innocence; record silent as to reasons	Claim dismissed: favorable termination not adequately pleaded for most charges; overall proceeding not favorably terminated under Kossler analysis
False arrest / false imprisonment	Arrest lacked probable cause; alleged no assault, profanity, resistance, or refusal to disperse	Court of Common Pleas found probable cause for some charges	Denied dismissal: factual dispute on probable cause for jury to decide
ADA failure-to-accommodate	Workplace harassment and medical issues (chest pain, PTSD, altered work duties) substantially limited major life activity of working	Complaint fails to plead impairment limiting a class or broad range of jobs	ADA claim dismissed without prejudice; leave to amend to plead substantial limitation

Spruill v. Gillis, 372 F.3d 218 (3d Cir. 2004) (pleading standard—accept well-pled allegations at motion to dismiss)
In re Burlington Coat Factory Sec. Litig., 114 F.3d 1410 (3d Cir. 1997) (12(b)(6) standards and consideration of documents integral to the complaint)
Victaulic Co. v. Tieman, 499 F.3d 227 (3d Cir. 2007) (Twombly plausibility standard explained)
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (complaint must raise entitlement to relief above speculative level)
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (pleading requirements for factual plausibility)
Fitchik v. New Jersey Transit Rail Operations, Inc., 873 F.2d 655 (3d Cir. 1989) (factors for Eleventh Amendment immunity inquiry)
Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida, 517 U.S. 44 (1996) (context on state sovereign immunity)
Alden v. Maine, 527 U.S. 706 (1999) (state immunity as core aspect of sovereignty)
Kossler v. Crisanti, 564 F.3d 181 (3d Cir. 2009) (elements of § 1983 malicious prosecution and favorable-termination analysis)
Donahue v. Gavin, 280 F.3d 371 (3d Cir. 2002) (nolle prosequi may suffice for favorable termination but depends on circumstances)
Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978) (municipal liability requires official policy or custom)