Court Opinion

ID: 9686676
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 16:00:51.246506+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:21.290360
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                            For the Eighth Circuit
                        ___________________________

                                No. 23-2649
                        ___________________________

                                Johnathon Watkins

                       lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

                                          v.

               Smithfield Packaged Meats Corp.; Beekam; Dusan

                      lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees
                                       ____________

                    Appeal from United States District Court
                   for the District of South Dakota - Southern
                                  ____________

                           Submitted: August 10, 2023
                             Filed: August 24, 2023
                                 [Unpublished]
                                 ____________

Before GRUENDER, ERICKSON, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.
                         ____________

PER CURIAM.

      Johnathon Watkins appeals the preservice dismissal of his employment-related
action against his former employer, Smithfield Packaged Meats Corp. (Smithfield),
and two co-workers. The district court1 construed Watkins’s complaint as raising
claims under Title VII. The court dismissed without prejudice the complaint as to
Smithfield for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, and dismissed with
prejudice the complaint as to the co-workers, reasoning that Title VII does not impose
liability on individuals.

      We conclude that the district court did not err in dismissing the complaint as
to Smithfield, as the complaint made no allegations concerning exhaustion of
administrative remedies. See Miles v. Bellfontaine Habilitation Ctr., 481 F.3d 1106,
1107 (8th Cir. 2007) (per curiam) (noting that a Title VII plaintiff must exhaust
administrative remedies before bringing suit and that Miles had adequately alleged
exhaustion by stating she had filed a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission and by attaching her right-to-sue letter to her complaint); Brooks v.
Midwest Heart Grp., 655 F.3d 796, 801 (8th Cir. 2011) (“[T]he statement in Brooks’s
complaint that she ‘timely filed charges of Employment Discrimination before the US
EEOC’ was sufficient to meet the liberal pleading standard of Rule 8(a).”). We
likewise agree with the district court that dismissal of the individual defendants was
warranted. See Powell v. Yellow Book USA, Inc., 445 F.3d 1074, 1079 (8th Cir.
2006).

      Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.
                     ______________________________

      1
       The Honorable Karen E. Schreier, United States District Judge for the District
of South Dakota.

                                         -2-