Caseflicks

District Court, D. Puerto Rico • 2007

Szendrey-Ramos v. First Bancorp

512 F. Supp. 2d 81 | 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74896

Full access

Unlock the video and quiz

The written brief is free to read below. Subscribe to watch the video explainer and take the quiz.

Create an account Log in

Takeaway

In short, the federal Title VII claims survived against the bank entities, but the broader, ethically sensitive Puerto Rico claims were left for Puerto Rico’s courts.

Background

Carmen Szendrey-Ramos, FirstBank’s general counsel, investigated possible accounting and ethics violations involving mortgage loans. She alleged that bank officials became hostile to her findings, excluded her from related negotiations, and later terminated her. She and her husband sued the bank entities and several individuals under Title VII and Puerto Rico law. The defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint, arguing in part that pursuing the claims would require Szendrey-Ramos to disclose confidential client information.

Issues

Issue #1

Whether the court should hear the Puerto Rico claims alongside the surviving federal employment claims.

Holding

No. The court declined supplemental jurisdiction and dismissed the Puerto Rico claims without prejudice.

Reasoning

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c), a district court may decline supplemental jurisdiction when state-law claims substantially predominate or raise novel or complex issues of state law. The decision also calls for attention to judicial economy, fairness, convenience, and comity.

The Puerto Rico claims went well beyond the two Title VII claims. They included wrongful discharge, constitutional, defamation, and tortious-interference theories with distinct elements and potentially extensive additional proof. The court concluded that they would substantially predominate.

Those claims also raised an unresolved question under Puerto Rico’s rules of professional ethics: whether a former in-house lawyer could pursue claims against her client when doing so might require disclosure of confidential information. Because the question implicated regulation of the Puerto Rico legal profession, comity favored leaving it to Puerto Rico’s courts.

Issue #2

Whether the Title VII claims should be dismissed at the pleading stage.

Holding

The discrimination and retaliation claims could proceed against the corporate defendants, but the claims against the individual defendants were dismissed with prejudice.

Reasoning

On a motion to dismiss, the court accepted well-pleaded facts as true and asked whether they plausibly supported relief. Szendrey-Ramos alleged that her termination was motivated by gender discrimination and pleaded supporting facts; she did not have to set out every fact that might ultimately prove her case. The court also allowed the retaliation claim to proceed.

Title VII does not impose individual liability, so the claims against the individual defendants could not proceed.

The court did not decide whether attorney-client confidentiality would ultimately limit proof of the Title VII claims. The need to disclose privileged information was still speculative, and protective measures could address particular disputes if they arose.