Where a former City of Richmond employee relied on the public policy against disability discrimination articulated in the Virginia Human Rights Act as a basis for a common law Bowman claim, that claim was dismissed with prejudice. Numerous Virginia courts have found that statutes containing their own remedy cannot also support a Bowman claim.
Background
On Oct. 28, 2022, Jamyce Vinson filed a five-count complaint against the City of Richmond, asserting claims for: (1) discrimination and retaliation in violation of Virginia Code § 8.01-216.8; (2) wrongful termination in violation of public policy; (3) section 504(a) of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; (4) disparate treatment and failure to accommodate in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act and (5) retaliation under the Family and Medical Leave Act. The city filed a motion to dismiss Counts One and Two.
Count One
Ms. Vinson agrees to the dismissal of Count One without prejudice. The city requests, however, that the court dismiss Count One with prejudice because “[n]otably missing from the Opposition is any statement from [Ms. Vinson] that she will at any time in the future be able to put forth additional facts surrounding the events giving rise to her Complaint in order to allege a valid cause of action under VFATA.”
The court finds it unlikely that any amendment could cure the defects of Count One given that the alleged conduct does not appear to be a claim under the Virginia Fraud against Taxpayers Act. On the...
A Delhi court has acquitted SKS Ispat and Power Ltd and four others, including the brother of former Union minister Subodh Kant Sahay, in a case related to alleged irregularities in the allocation...