Rivera-Cartagena v. Wal-Mart Puerto Rico, Inc.
767 F. Supp. 2d 310
D.P.R.2011Background
- Plaintiffs allege Rivera was discharged by Wal-Mart for discriminatory reasons related to his Puerto Rico National Guard service, after years of advancement and strong performance.
- Rivera asserts the termination occurred shortly after he notified Wal-Mart of upcoming military training, with alleged accompanying discriminatory comments and actions by Wal-Mart personnel.
- Gibson is named in the complaint; Wal-Mart seeks dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) arguing lack of USERRA employer status for Gibson and absence of factual support for his participation in discriminatory actions.
- Plaintiffs concede some claims are time-barred and move for voluntary dismissal of claims against certain defendants, leaving remaining issues related to USERRA against Gibson, 1802/1803 under Puerto Rico Civil Code, and constitutional claims against Wal-Mart and Gibson.
- The court resolves several claims: USERRA claim against Gibson is dismissed; Article 1802/1803 claims by Velez and the conjugal partnership are dismissed; Rivera’s PR Constitution claim against Gibson is dismissed; Rivera’s PR Constitution claim against Wal-Mart remains viable.
- Additionally, unnamed defendants ABC Insurance Company, John Doe, and Jane Doe are dismissed with prejudice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is Gibson an 'employer' under USERRA? | Gibson had control over Rivera's termination and thus is an employer. | Gibson lacked decision-making power over suspension/termination and was not shown to have knowledge of military status. | No; Gibson not an employer under USERRA. |
| Are Velez and the conjugal partnership entitled to independent 1802/1803 claims? | They are relatives entitled to separate claims arising from same acts. | They lack independent torts distinct from Rivera's discrimination claims. | DISMISSED; no independent 1802/1803 claims for Velez or conjugal. |
| Do Rivera's rights under the Puerto Rico Constitution survive against Wal-Mart and Gibson? | Rivera alleges dignity and privacy violations and employment discrimination infringing constitutional rights. | No actionable constitutional violation by Gibson; standing and private-right theories misapplied. | Rivera's constitutional claim against Gibson dismissed; Rivera's constitutional claim against Wal-Mart survives. |
| Do Rivera's and Wal-Mart/Gibson's PR Constitution-based claims require dismissal for lack of standing or private-right violation against private actors? | Standing is sufficient to bring PR Constitution claims against private employers for discrimination-related injuries. | Constitutional protections primarily guard against state action; private-employer context requires statutory remedies. | Rivera's claims against Wal-Mart remain viable; Velez and conjugal claims dismissed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Rodríguez‑Ortiz v. Margo Caribe, Inc., 490 F.3d 92 (1st Cir.2007) (plausibility standard for pleadings; Twombly standard applied)
- Velázquez-García v. Horizon Lines of Puerto Rico, Inc., 473 F.3d 11 (1st Cir.2007) (pretext framework for USERRA discrimination claims)
- Carreras v. Sajo, 596 F.3d 25 (1st Cir.2010) (pretext and discriminatory motivation factors in USERRA cases)
- Desert Palace, Inc. v. Costa, 539 U.S. 90 (2003) (circumstantial evidence allowed to prove discrimination)
- Correa-Martínez v. Arrillaga-Beléndez, 903 F.2d 49 (1st Cir.1990) (pleading standard; factual inferences in plaintiff's favor)
- O'Neil v. Putnam Retail Mgmt., LLP, 407 F. Supp. 2d 310 (D. Mass.2005) (USERRA employer concept and burden-shifting)
- Aulson v. Blanchard, 83 F.3d 1 (1st Cir.1996) (rejecting bare, conclusory allegations)
- Twombly v. Bell Atl. Corp., 550 U.S. 544 (U.S.2007) (pleading must plead factual content plausibly giving rise to relief)
- Barreto v. ITT World Directories, Inc., 62 F. Supp. 2d 387 (D.P.R.1999) (supplementary Civil Code with statutory claims; standing principles)