1:13-cv-12057
D. Mass.Oct 9, 2013Background
- Laureano worked for Legal Sea Foods as a senior chef from 2002 until his termination in 2010; he had documented neck, back, shoulder, and knee injuries and took medical leave in April–May 2010.
- A new supervisor allegedly made ageist comments and Laureano reported them; investigations into those reports were not completed.
- While Laureano was out, a dishwasher improperly reported vacation/time; Laureano was later accused of improperly documenting that employee’s time and was discharged on May 19, 2010.
- Laureano filed administrative discrimination charges (MCAD and EEOC) and then sued in state court asserting age and disability discrimination (federal and state law) and a breach-of-contract claim based on defendant’s employee handbook; the case was removed to federal court.
- Legal Sea Foods moved to dismiss the breach-of-contract count (Count 5); Laureano moved to amend Count 5 and to add a claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the common-law breach-of-contract claim (based on handbook policies) may proceed alongside Chapter 151B discrimination claims | Laureano contends the handbook created an implied employment contract and that Legal Sea Foods breached it by failing to follow anti-discrimination policies | Legal Sea Foods argues Chapter 151B provides the exclusive state-law remedy for employment-discrimination claims, barring common-law contract claims that are essentially discrimination claims | The court held Count 5 must be dismissed under Chapter 151B exclusivity because the breach claim mirrors the statutory discrimination claims |
| Whether proposed amendment to Count 5 cures the Chapter 151B exclusivity problem | Laureano sought to add allegations (e.g., failure to investigate) to make Count 5 viable | Legal Sea Foods maintained the new allegations still dress a 151B claim in contract language and thus are barred | The court held the proposed amendment would be futile and denied leave to amend |
| Whether a claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing may be added | Laureano argued implied covenant claim is proper based on employer conduct at termination | Legal Sea Foods argued the public-policy protection against discrimination is already covered exclusively by Chapter 151B | The court held the implied covenant claim is barred by Chapter 151B’s exclusivity and denied leave to add it |
| Whether Chapter 151B preempts Laureano’s federal ADEA/ADA claims | — | Legal Sea Foods did not seek dismissal of federal claims on preemption grounds | The court noted Chapter 151B does not preempt federal ADEA/ADA claims; those may proceed separately |
Key Cases Cited
- Charland v. Muzi Motors, 417 Mass. 580 (1994) (Chapter 151B provides exclusive remedy for employment discrimination under state law)
- Green v. Wyman-Gordon Co., 422 Mass. 551 (1996) (affirming dismissal of common-law claims as barred by Chapter 151B)
- Mouradian v. General Elec. Co., 23 Mass. App. Ct. 538 (1987) (dismissing breach-of-contract and implied-covenant claims that merely replicate Chapter 151B allegations)
- Twombly v. Bell Atl. Corp., 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (plausibility pleading standard for complaints)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937 (2009) (pleading must contain sufficient factual matter to state a plausible claim)