Greer v. Wormuth
- Maxine Chesney
- 3:24-cv-00614
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Greer v. Wormuth, Judge Chesney granted defendants’ motion to dismiss and dismissed Greer’s amended complaint without further leave to amend.
Roger E. Greer’s Title VII discrimination and retaliation claims and his Rehabilitation Act discrimination, failure-to-accommodate, and retaliation claims were dismissed. The defendants’ motion to dismiss was granted, the First Amended Complaint was dismissed without further leave to amend, and the file was closed.
What happened
In Greer v. Wormuth, Roger E. Greer challenged the Department of the Army’s 2015 termination of his employment after random drug tests showed amphetamine and methamphetamine. Greer represented himself and did not respond to the defendants’ motion to dismiss.
The court previously allowed Greer to amend his complaint after finding that his claims lacked supporting facts. In the amended complaint, Greer still did not allege facts showing discrimination under Title VII, disability discrimination or failure to accommodate under the Rehabilitation Act, or a connection between his earlier equal-employment complaint and his termination.
The court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss and dismissed the First Amended Complaint without further leave to amend. Judge Maxine M. Chesney directed the clerk to close the file.
The detailed version
- Greer v. Wormuth · No. 3:24-cv-00614
- Maxine Chesney
- Aug. 14, 2024
Background
The defendants—the Department of the Army and Christine Wormuth—moved to dismiss Roger E. Greer’s First Amended Complaint. Greer proceeded without a lawyer and did not file a response. His claims arose from a June 2015 notice of termination and subsequent termination of his Department of the Army employment. Greer alleged that the termination resulted from positive random drug tests for amphetamine and methamphetamine.
The court had previously dismissed Greer’s initial complaint for failure to state a claim, meaning that the complaint did not allege enough facts to support a legally valid claim. The court allowed Greer to amend, and he filed the First Amended Complaint.
Claims and Analysis
The court dismissed Greer’s Title VII discrimination claim because the amended complaint added no facts showing that his employment was terminated because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
The court also dismissed Greer’s Rehabilitation Act claims for discrimination and failure to accommodate. Greer stated that he was not actually disabled but was “regarded as” having a disabling impairment. The court explained that such a claim is legally possible, but Greer alleged no facts showing that the defendants regarded him as disabled. The court further stated that, even assuming the defendants regarded him as disabled, Greer’s allegation that he tested positive for illegal drugs two months before the termination, with no allegation that the result was incorrect, barred his Rehabilitation Act claims under the statutory illegal-drug-use provision.
Finally, the court dismissed Greer’s retaliation claims. Greer alleged that he filed an equal-employment complaint in or around August 2014, but he alleged no facts showing a connection between that filing and the termination notice issued about ten months later. The court concluded that the alleged timing did not establish the required causal connection.
Disposition
The court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the First Amended Complaint and dismissed the First Amended Complaint without further leave to amend. The court vacated the scheduled hearing and directed the clerk to close the file.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.