Kathryn Sheppard v. David Evans and Assoc.

Good Law
694 F.3d 1045·2012 WL 3983909·115 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1665·96 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 44,643·2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 19135
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 12, 201211-35164California1,778 words

Opinion

Opinion

Pregerson, J.

In 2010 Plaintiff-Appellant Kathryn Sheppard (“Sheppard”) filed a complaint in federal district court against her former employer, David Evans and Associates (“Evans”). The complaint alleged causes of action for: (1) employment discrimination under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”); and (2) “wrongful discharge” under Oregon law. The district court dismissed Sheppard’s complaint, with leave to amend, for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2). Sheppard then filed an amended complaint alleging the same causes of action and adding some factual details. The district court dismissed Sheppard’s amended complaint with prejudice concluding she had “failed to plead any cause of action with sufficient factual detail to state a claim,” and therefore failed to satisfy the pleading requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2). Sheppard appeals the district court’s ruling.

As discussed below, we conclude that Sheppard’s amended complaint, while brief, nonetheless satisfies Rule 8(a)(2)’s pleading standard. Accordingly, we re verse the district court’s dismissal of Sheppard’s amended complaint.

BACKGROUND

The allegations in…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.