Opinion ID: 760383
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Individual Liability Under Title VII.

Text: 14 Arnaudet sought dismissal for failure to state a claim against him pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). The district court applied settled Fifth Circuit law in holding that employees may not be sued for damages in their individual capacities. The court also reasoned that it would be redundant for Indest to sue both Arnaudet in his official capacity and Freeman, because Freeman would bear responsibility for the liability of either party through Title VII's incorporation of the principle of vicarious liability. 15 Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes it an unlawful employment practice for an employer ... to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual's ... sex. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1). While Title VII defines the term employer to include any agent of an employer, id. § 2000e(b), this circuit does not interpret the statute as imposing individual liability for such a claim. See Pfau v. Reed, 125 F.3d 927, 935-36 (5th Cir.1997). 4 Congress's purpose in extending the definition of an employer to encompass an agent in Section 2000e(b) was simply to incorporate respondeat superior liability into Title VII. Grant v. Lone Star Co., 21 F.3d 649, 652 (5th Cir.1994); see also Miller v. Maxwell's Int'l Inc., 991 F.2d 583, 587 (9th Cir.1993). Thus, a Title VII suit against an employee is actually a suit against the corporation. 16 This court has also concluded that outside of an action against an officer personally, a plaintiff does not have an action against both the corporation and its officer in an official capacity. Sims v. Jefferson Downs Racing Assoc., Inc., 778 F.2d 1068, 1081 (5th Cir.1985) (suit brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983). Here, the district court dismissed Arnaudet as a defendant based on the logic of Sims and an Eastern District of Louisiana case, Allen v. Tulane Univ., No. CIV.A.92-4070, 1993 WL 459949 (E.D.La. Nov.2, 1993), which specifically found that the Plaintiff is not entitled to maintain an action against both a corporation and its agent in an official capacity [in a Title VII action] because effectively the corporation could be held liable twice for the same act. Allen, 1993 WL 459949, at  4. 5 We agree that in accordance with Sims, a party may not maintain a suit against both an employer and its agent under Title VII. 17