At dismissal stage, employee's suit not preempted by LMRA.

Byline: Barry Bridges

A plaintiff's suit alleging that her employer, Twin River Casino, subjected her to false arrest, malicious prosecution and intentional infliction of emotional distress is not preempted at the early stages of the litigation by the federal Labor Management Relations Act, as it was not evident to a federal judge whether the claims are dependent upon the parties' collective bargaining agreement.

U.S. District Court Chief Judge John J. McConnell Jr. made the ruling in an action brought by Elizabeth Sankey, who was arrested during one of her shifts at the casino after Twin River, for reasons not stated in the record, summoned the State Police. Although not prosecuted for any crimes, Sankey was terminated from her job as a result of the incident.

After contesting her discharge under the CBA between her union and Twin River, Sankey was reinstated to her position by an arbitrator and made whole for lost wages and benefits.

Sankey mounted the present suit against Twin River in 2019, maintaining that her employer caused her false arrest, unlawful detention and malicious prosecution. She further alleged defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Twin River moved to dismiss under Federal Rule 12(b)(6), arguing that the LMRA's governance of CBA-based claims precludes the action.

McConnell denied the motion, explaining that the record does not demonstrate whether the allegations are dependent on the CBA agreement.

"[P]urely factual questions about an employee's conduct or an employer's conduct and motives do not require a court to interpret any term of a collective bargaining agreement," he wrote. "The court...