Where a wife filed multiple claims against her husband’s company, alleging she was not paid a regular salary for 11 years of work, but none of her claims were plausible, it was not clear whether the company was subject to certain employment statutes, it was not clear if she was an employee and some of the claims appeared to be time barred, her suit was dismissed.
Shakhnoza Kanev, who is proceeding pro se, filed a multi-count complaint against her husband’s company, Rebec Vineyards Corp. She alleges violations of Title VII, the Americans with Disabilities Act, or ADA, the Equal Pay Act, or EPA, the Fair Labor Standards Act, or FLSA, and common law fraud. The gist of her case is that she worked from “August 2013 through August 2024” for the winery but was “never paid a regular salary.”
Rather than paying the $405 filing fee, she sought to proceed in forma pauperis.
The court granted her motion and must now conduct an initial screening of her complaint. If the court determines her allegations of poverty are untrue or that her complaint fails to state a claim, the court must sua sponte dismiss the complaint.
Plaintiff only alleges that “Defendant failed to pay [her] equal wages, treated her less favorably than male employees, and exploited her labor.” This conclusory statement fails to identify factual circumstances that suggest plaintiff was discriminated against based on her sex. Moreover, plaintiff fails to identify when any instance of...
Iran has denied targeting a joint military base of the United States and the United Kingdom on the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia with missiles, dismissing the claim as an “Israeli false flag...