United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
C. COLLINS UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
matter comes before the Court on the motion of plaintiff
Tammy Nicole Shanklin for leave to commence this civil action
without payment of the required filing fee. (Docket No. 2).
Having reviewed the motion and the financial information
submitted in support, the Court finds it should be granted.
Additionally, for the reasons discussed below, the Court will
direct the Clerk of Court to issue process on defendant
is a pro se litigant who brings this civil action pursuant to
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII). She
names Friendship Village as defendant. (Docket No. 1 at 2).
Plaintiff alleges that she was terminated from employment at
Friendship Village on the basis of her race and color.
(Docket No. 1 at 4-5).
states that she was hired by Friendship Village on September
26, 2014 as a certified medication technician. (Docket No.
1-4). On May 15, 2019, plaintiff was called into the office
by the day shift supervisor. Plaintiff was told that she
needed to “pep up [her] step, ” fix her hair, and
“start wearing different hairstyles.” (Docket No.
1 at 5). She was further advised that no one wanted her to
take care of their family members because of the way she
looked. Plaintiff asserts that the comments made to her were
racially motivated, as she is African-American. (Docket No. 1
at 5; Docket No. 1-4).
3, 2019, plaintiff was terminated by Friendship Village.
(Docket No. 1-4). Plaintiff states that a patient's
family had complained about her making the patient eat dinner
in the dining room, rather than the patient's own room.
(Docket No. 1 at 6). She was advised that she was being fired
“for poor customer service.” However, plaintiff
asserts that her actions did not constitute an offense for
which she could be fired. She also claims that human
resource's termination protocol was not followed.
Plaintiff alleges that she “was retaliated against and
discharged because of [her] race.” (Docket No. 1-4). As
a result, she is seeking $200, 000 in damages. (Docket No. 1
states that she filed a charge of discrimination with the
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) on July 29,
2019. (Docket No. 1 at 3). The EEOC sent her a right to sue
letter on August 6, 2019. Plaintiff filed the instant action
on October 24, 2019.
brings this civil action pursuant to Title VII, alleging that
she was terminated from her employment at Friendship Village
on the basis of her race. The purpose of Title VII is to
ensure a workplace environment free of discrimination.
Ricci v. DeStefano, 557 U.S. 557, 580 (2009). The
act prohibits “employer discrimination on the basis of
race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, in hiring,
firing, salary structure, promotion and the like.”
Winfrey v. City of Forrest City, Ark., 882 F.3d 757,
758 (8th Cir. 2018).
filing an action under Title VII in federal court, a
plaintiff must first exhaust his or her administrative
remedies. Lindeman v. Saint Luke's Hosp. of Kansas
City, 899 F.3d 603, 608 (8th Cir. 2018). See also
Brooks v. Midwest Heart Grp., 655 F.3d 796, 800 (8th
Cir. 2011) (stating that “Title VII establishes an
administrative procedure which a complaining employee must
follow before filing a lawsuit in federal court”). A
Title VII claimant is required to demonstrate good faith
participation in the administrative process in order to
exhaust his or her administrative remedies. Briley v.
Carlin, 172 F.3d 567, 571 (8th Cir. 1999). “To
exhaust administrative remedies an individual must: (1)
timely file a charge of discrimination with the EEOC setting
forth the facts and nature of the charge and (2) receive
notice of the right to sue.” Rush v. State of
Arkansas DWS, 876 F.3d 1123, 1125 (8th Cir. 2017).
charge of discrimination must be filed with the EEOC
“within one-hundred and eighty days after the alleged
unlawful employment practice occurred.” 42 U.S.C.
§ 2000e-5(e)(1). Once a plaintiff receives notice of the
right to sue, he or she must file a civil action within
ninety days. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1).
plaintiff's Title VII action appears to be timely and
exhausted. The alleged discriminatory action occurred on June
3, 2019. Plaintiff filed a charge of discrimination on July
29, 2019, fifty-six days later. Thus, plaintiff filed her
charge of discrimination within the one-hundred and eighty
days provided by statute.
EEOC mailed plaintiff a right to sue letter on August 6,
2019, giving her ninety days in which to file a civil action.
Plaintiff filed a complaint on October 24, 2019, seventy-nine
days later. Thus, plaintiff filed the instant action within
the ninety-day window provided by statute. As such, the Clerk
of Court will be directed to issue process upon defendant