Submitted Date: December 11, 2017
Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint.
Charles E. Butler Judge
the Court is a motion filed by Defendant Amazon, LLC
("Amazon") to dismiss the Complaint. For the
reasons set forth below, the motion is GRANTED.
August 23, 2017, Plaintiff Akinniyi Shiyanbola
("Plaintiff) filed a pro se Complaint in this
Court against Amazon-his former employer.
According to the Complaint, on August 19, 2015, a manager at
Amazon asked Plaintiff to take a drug test after
"watching a suspicious video, where in they suspected
his manner was questionable." Plaintiff
"obliged" and was suspended without pay pending the
Despite his suspension, Plaintiff went into work on August
24, 2015, after calling an employee hotline and finding
"no record of the suspension and the drug
Plaintiff arrived at work, he was "summoned" to his
manager's office where she "proceeded to read him a
script from her laptop." According to the police report
filed as an exhibit to Plaintiffs Complaint, Plaintiff was
advised that he was terminated and instructed to immediately
leave the premises. In response, Plaintiff "expressed his
dissatisfaction with her malice" and then attempted to
return to "his post" at work. Plaintiff was
eventually arrested and charged with criminal trespass.
While not at all clear, Plaintiff s Complaint appears to
identify-at least nominally-three causes of action in
connection with Amazon's conduct in terminating his
employment: breach of contract, tortious interference with
contractual relations, and intentional infliction of
emotional distress. Plaintiff seeks relief on these claims in
the form of back pay as well as $3, 300, 000 in punitive
Amazon has moved to dismiss the Complaint, arguing that it
does not satisfy the pleading requirements. Amazon argues
that even accepting all allegations in the Complaint as true,
Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can
be granted. Plaintiff responds by asserting that Amazon has
"failed to prove" a variety of facts related to the
allegations in Plaintiffs Complaint. Plaintiff, in both his
Complaint and response to the motion to dismiss, also cites
to a number of statutes governing the sale or lease of
commercial goods that are simply inapplicable to any of the
facts or allegations in the Complaint.
motion to dismiss pursuant to Delaware Superior Court Civil
Rule 12(b)(6) will not be granted if the plaintiff may
recover under any reasonably conceivable set of circumstances
susceptible of proof under the complaint. All well-pled
allegations in the complaint must be accepted as true,
every reasonable factual inference will be drawn in favor of
the plaintiff. Dismissal is appropriate where the
plaintiff has failed to plead facts supporting an element of
the claim, or under no reasonable interpretation of the facts
alleged could the complaint state a claim for which relief
might be granted.
appropriate, this Court will hold a pro se
plaintiffs complaint to a less demanding standard of
review. But "there is no different set of
rules fox pro se plaintiffs, " and the
Court's leniency cannot go so far as to affect the
substantive rights of the parties.
order to survive a motion to dismiss, a plaintiff pleading
breach of contract must allege: (1) the existence of a
contract; (2) that the contract was breached; and (3) damages
suffered as a result of the breach. Because Plaintiffs
Complaint fails to allege the existence of a contract or that
the contract was breached in some way, Plaintiffs claim for
breach of contract must be dismissed.
elements of a tortious interference with contractual
relations claim are well established under Delaware law.
"There must be (1) a contract, (2) about which defendant
knew and (3) an intentional act that is a significant factor
in causing the breach of such contract (4) without
justification (5) which causes injury, " "The
claim must be directed at a defendant who is not a party to
the contract." Because Plaintiffs Complaint fails to
allege the existence of a contract-or, as far as the Court
can tell, any other ...