Smith v. Local Union 1863, Int'l Longshoremen's Assoc. of Clerks and Checkers

The trial court erred in dismissing the plaintiff's suit under the Georgia Equal Employment for Persons With Disabilities Code where the allegations in his complaint virtually tracked parts of the statute and were sufficient to put the defendant on notice of his claim.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

R. D. Smith, Jr. sued Local Union Number 1863 of the International Longshoreman’s Association of Clerks and Checkers the “Union”, alleging that the Union failed to employ him “because of his handicap.” The Union did not file an answer, but moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground that it failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Smith opposed the Union’s motion and moved for a default judgment. The trial court denied Smith’s motion and granted the Union’s motion to dismiss. Smith appeals, and for reasons that follow, we reverse. Smith alleged in his complaint that he is a Union member with “a handicap, which interferes with one or more of his major life activities.” He claimed that the Union “violated his rights under the law by failing to provide available work to him because of his handicap.” According to the complaint, the Union’s “violations of Smith’s rights were willful and intentional, and Smith should therefore recover punitive damages in an amount sufficient to deter the Union from willfully violating the law in the future.” Smith also sought “statutory damages and reasonable attorney’s fees.” In addition to monetary damages, Smith prayed for “temporary and permanent injunctive relief enjoining the Union from discriminating against him and from violating his rights under Georgia law.”

The Union was served with Smith’s complaint on October 17, 2000. On November 2, 2000, without filing an answer, the Union filed its motion to dismiss. The Union argued that the complaint should be dismissed because it did not identify the laws underlying Smith’s claim. Assuming that Smith was relying on the Georgia Equal Employment for Persons With Disabilities Code1 the “Act”, the Union further contended that the complaint should be dismissed because it lacked Smith’s written consent and failed to show that the claim was timely filed under the Act.2

Smith v. Local Union 1863, Int'l Longshoremen's Assoc. of Clerks and Checkers

The trial court erred in dismissing the plaintiff's suit under the Georgia Equal Employment for Persons With Disabilities Code where the allegations in his complaint virtually tracked parts of the statute and were sufficient to put the defendant on notice of his claim.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report