Marley Whistleblower Lawsuit: City files Motion to Dismiss

Submitted by Adam Kaufman
Legal Analyst
December 11, 2014 3:12 p.m.

Robin Marley, fired Fernandina Beach HR Director
Robin Marley, fired Fernandina Beach HR Director

Attorneys for the City of Fernandina Beach have filed a Motion to Dismiss the complaint in the lawsuit initiated by Robin Marley, the City’s former Human Resources Director, who was terminated by the City Manager on October 30. The Motion was filed in the Fourth Judicial Circuit Court on December 10, 2014

Marley has sued the City alleging that she was fired in violation of Florida’s Whistleblower Act for reporting and disclosing an act or suspected acts of “gross mismanagement” within the City’s Fire Department to City Manager Joe Gerrity.

A Motion to Dismiss is a procedural motion made before a defendant answers the complaint in the litigation. It generally asserts that the complaint, on its face, does not allege a prima facie case and/or is procedurally defective.

The City argues that Marley’s complaint does not plead sufficient facts to support a claim under the Whistleblower Act, requests damages or relief that would be unavailable to Marley under that Act and is allegedly otherwise procedurally defective in the manner it asserts claims against the City.

In ruling on a Motion to Dismiss the court must confine itself to the allegations within the complaint and must accept the allegations as true. The court must also make all reasonable inferences arising out of the allegations in favor of the plaintiff and may not speculate as to what the true facts may be or what facts may ultimately be proven in the trial.

It is not uncommon for complaints that are dismissed as a result of a Motion to Dismiss to be dismissed “without prejudice” with leave granted to the plaintiff to amend the complaint.

The Motion to Dismiss, in its entirety, follows.

Marley1Marley2Marley3Marley4Marley5Marley6Marley7

Adam Kaufman - s Copyright Steve Leimberg - UnSeenImages.Com _U0U0724Adam Kaufman is a semi-retired mediator and attorney. A graduate of Northwestern University School of Law, he was born and raised in the Bronx, NY. and attended NYC public schools, including Stuyvesant High School. He still serves on the American Arbitration Association Labor Panel. From 1994 – 2005, he was Regional Director for the New York State Public Employment Relations Board.

17 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Dave Lott
Dave Lott(@dave-l)
9 years ago

Adam, isn’t this a customary tactic of the plantiff to get such actioms dismised in the initial stages especially if the plantiff believes there are jurisdictional or procedural errors?

Adam Kaufman
Adam Kaufman(@adkresolvecomcast-net)
9 years ago
Reply to  Dave Lott

David: Yes, it is a procedural tactical and it delays the time the City has to answer on the merits of the complaint. That, of course, is not to say that the Marley complaint is a perfect pleading. It also, as a practical matter, allows additional time for the parties to settle.
ADK

Robert Warner
Robert Warner (@guest_25141)
9 years ago

Yes.

Robert Warner
Robert Warner (@guest_25143)
9 years ago

Defendant, that is.

Dave Lott
Dave Lott(@dave-l)
9 years ago

Yes, Robin is the plantiff in the original suit but I thought the City would be the plantiff in this motion, but since it is a motion and not a new lawsuit, the roles are unchanged. Back for a refresher course in my Perry Mason legal training again.

John Jay
John Jay (@guest_25165)
9 years ago

I support Robin Marley for having the courage to speak up for what she feels is right. The Whistle Blower law protects people in these circumstances and encourages all people to step up and do what is right – these legal maneuvers trying to dismiss THE obvious and known is just a buying time weak stall!

Steve Crounse
Steve Crounse (@guest_25173)
9 years ago
Reply to  John Jay

John Jay, I wish you were still on the Supreme Court. Those were the days. I also support Ms. Marley and think she will be victorious. Just hope our city Gov’t does not beat this dog to death like Impact Fees. Just settle with miss Marley and stop doing this stuff.

Larry Myers
Larry Myers (@guest_25168)
9 years ago

The motion to dismiss , if successful, will just identify a shortcoming in the lawsuit…allow the plaintiff an opportunity to amend and improve their legal actions.

The City should consider the cost of settling this matter and cut years of legal actions and court fees. Most organizations try to settle at the lowest amount and cut their costs.

Stumpjumper
Stumpjumper (@guest_25171)
9 years ago
Reply to  Larry Myers

If Ms. Marley is indeed owned anything because of her termination, she should be awarded whatever amount is deemed reasonable. If she is found to be wrong, then she needs to pay ALL court costs, attorneys fees and any other costs associated with this lawsuit.

tony crawford
tony crawford (@guest_25176)
9 years ago

Why does this look like history revisited? If you keep making the same mistakes the outcome is usually the same. On the surface, and from what information has come out, it seems we have an human resource manager with 10 years experience with the City. She has a history in human resources which would lead one to believe that this isn’t her first rodeo. She gets a merit increase and never had a bad performance review from the City. There is a known history of some unsatisfactory behavior within the fire dept. She addresses these issues with some personnel who were hired to correct this. I don’t know Ms Marley personally. I would think however that with her past history in the field and her outstanding performance reviews and her merit raises, the City felt she was doing an outstanding job. Something just does.t seem to fit here. Sounds as if she was too good and experienced in the field of human resources to put herself and her career in such a compromising spot. I am sure the City has their points and feel they are justified with this. My hope is that cooler heads prevail and we as a City don’t get in yet another game of chicken.

Berniece Thornton
Berniece Thornton (@guest_25263)
9 years ago
Reply to  tony crawford

Well said!!

Robert Warner
Robert Warner (@guest_25180)
9 years ago

Sustained lawsuits are now close to gambling. Our problems lay in the general public never appreciating anything but a zero sum game, and never appreciating a quality negotiation process – or those who actually must participate in the process. Damn, do I ever hate the blame game.

tony crawford
tony crawford (@guest_25182)
9 years ago

Robert, not the blame game that is in question. In this case it appears,– note I say appears, that this is going to be a hard one for the city to win. I appreciate the City’s attempts to try to save us taxpayers money. There are times however where the cost of fighting any lawsuit becomes prohibitive at some point. One would only hope that in the case of Ms Marley the City has all it’s ducks in a row, as I said ” on the surface it doesn’t sound good”. I am sure their is much information we aren’t privy to. Lets just hope that this can be settled in a fair and reasonable way by all parties.

Larry Myers
Larry Myers (@guest_25206)
9 years ago

I do not have a legal background & am not an attorney. Looking at general information: Whistleblowing by a person, usually an employee in a government agency or private organization to the public or to those in authority of possible mismanagement or other wrong doing ….. usually leads to some form of reprisal against the person. Whistleblowers are a different unique legal subject. There are Federal & Florida Laws & Court precedents and attorneys that specialize in Whistleblowing.
If this legal activity continues over the years, like the airport & the impact fee lawsuits, then there will be a need for specialized outside legal counsel, court costs, payments of all sorts, etc. that will run up the $$$. The 2 lawsuits could have been settled early on, rather simply & cheaply. But no, the City ran both up into the millions. Lets hope we are learning and that cooler heads prevail and resolve this issue at the least cost to the taxpayer.

Stumpjumper
Stumpjumper (@guest_25218)
9 years ago
Reply to  Larry Myers

Mr. Myers, FB has now elected 2 new commissioners who will listen to council and the people. Their decisions will be hard but well thought out. You have one more power broker to get out of office and I can’t help believe FB will have a council who will do the right things and not worry about what they can get out of it. If the News-Leader would just report the news and not make the news, FB would be better off!

FB Tax Payer
FB Tax Payer (@guest_25238)
9 years ago
Reply to  Stumpjumper

Don’t bet on it. Commissioner Lentz had no record, but Commissioner Poytner does. He may vote the way you want, but not necessarily the way the majority of the public would like. Check the record closely.

Stumpjumper
Stumpjumper (@guest_25307)
9 years ago
Reply to  FB Tax Payer

Then please answer me this? Why, was Pelican and Corbett defeated, if what you are saying is true. When you align yourself with certain elected officials in our county and become mouth pieces,for what they want done, then what do expect? The people have seen right thru these tactics. When you are being told how to vote even after 100’s of voters show up,and tell you how they think and you go,ahead and vote the opposite, you lose the confidence of the people.