Stinnett v. W.K.S. Frosty Corporation, 4:24-cv-00121

Plaintiff, a transgender woman, alleges discrimination during her employment at W.K.S. Frosty Corporation's restaurant in Owensboro, Kentucky.
Plaintiff brings claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Kentucky Civil Rights Act, alleging discrimination, retaliation, and hostile work environment.
Defendant moved for leave to amend its Answer to add an affirmative defense claiming Plaintiff failed to exhaust her administrative remedies.
The motion was based on the Defendant's assertion that not all of Plaintiff's claims, especially retaliation, were raised before the EEOC.
Plaintiff argued the amendment would be futile, as her written EEOC charge sufficiently referenced retaliation.
The court had to decide whether to grant the Defendant’s motion to amend its pleadings to add this defense.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Leave to amend to add failure to exhaust	Futile; charge narrative included retaliation	Narrative insufficient; box not checked; counselled party	Motion to amend GRANTED.
Sufficiency of EEOC claim for retaliation	Narrative covered retaliation conduct	No explicit retaliation claim in EEOC documents	Court not deciding exhaustion at this stage.
Applicability of futility standard	Would fail Rule 12(b)(6) standard	Could withstand Rule 12(b)(6); may be viable defense	Amendment possible unless clearly futile.
Timing of defense assertion	Should not be added at this stage	More appropriately tested on summary judgment after discovery	Allowed now; merits for later adjudication.

Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178 (1962) (leave to amend should generally be freely given unless certain factors are present)
Rose v. Hartford Underwriters Ins. Co., 203 F.3d 417 (6th Cir. 2000) (futility exists only if amendment could not survive a motion to dismiss)
Davis v. Sodexho, Cumberland College Cafeteria, 157 F.3d 460 (6th Cir. 1998) (general reference to a type of discrimination in an EEOC charge may suffice to encompass the claim)