Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

Horowitz v. AT&T Inc.

Horowitz v. AT&T Inc.

United States District Court for the District of New Jersey

April 25, 2018, Decided; April 25, 2018, Filed

Civil Action No. 3:17-cv-4827-BRM-LHG

Opinion

Martinotti, District Judge

Before this Court are: (1) AT&T, Inc.'s ("INC")1 Motion to Dismiss against Roy Horowitz ("Horowitz"), Linda Larson ("Larson"), Kempton Pollard ("Pollard"), Katherine Seaman ("Seaman"), and Kathleen Sweeney ("Sweeney," collectively "Plaintiffs") for lack of jurisdiction (ECF No. 21); (2) AT&T Services, Inc. ("SERVICES") and AT&T Mobility Services, LLC's ("MOBILITY") Motion to Dismiss Larson and Pollard's claims for lack of jurisdiction (ECF No. 23); and (3) AT&T Corp. ("CORP"), SERVICES, and MOBILITY'S Motion [*2]  to Dismiss for failure to state a claim (ECF No. 22).2 Plaintiffs oppose all motions. (ECF Nos. 41, 42, and 43.) Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 78(a), the Court heard oral argument on April 10, 2018. For the reasons set forth below, INC'sMotion to Dismiss for lack of jurisdiction is DENIED; SERVICES and MOBILITY'S Motion to Dismiss Larson and Pollard's claims for lack of jurisdiction is GRANTED; and CORP, SERVICE, and MOBILITY'S Motion to Dismiss for failure to state a claim is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.

I. Background

A. Factual Background

] For the purposes of the motions to dismiss, the Court accepts the factual allegations in the Complaint as true and draws all inferences in the light most favorable to Plaintiffs. See Phillips v. Cty. of Allegheny, 515 F.3d 224, 228 (3d Cir. 2008). The Court also considers any "document integral to or explicitly relied upon in the complaint." In re Burlington Coat Factory Sec. Litig., 114 F.3d 1410, 1426 (3d Cir. 1997). This matter involves violations of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act ("ADEA") in which, it is alleged, Defendants engaged in a "company-wide plan" to replace the aging workforce in Defendants' corporations with a younger one by the year 2020 (the "2020 Scheme"), with a three-step "surplus" then termination and fraudulent release scheme. (See Compl. (ECF No. 1).)

1. The Parties

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69191 *; 2018 WL 1942525

ROY HOROWITZ, LINDA LARSON, KEMPTEN POLLARD, KATHERINE SEAMAN, and KATHLEEN SWEENEY, Plaintiffs, v. AT&T INC., AT&T CORP., AT&T SERVICES, INC., and AT&T MOBILITY SERVICES LLC, Defendants.

Notice: NOT FOR PUBLICATION

Subsequent History: Reconsideration denied by, Request denied by Horowitz v. AT&T Inc., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58 (D.N.J., Jan. 2, 2019)

Motion granted by Horowitz v. AT&T Inc., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60 (D.N.J., Jan. 2, 2019)

CORE TERMS

personal jurisdiction, subsidiary, motion to dismiss, general jurisdiction, employees, class action, termination, courts, do business, rights, waive, service of process, principal place of business, registered, surplus, allegations, residents, contacts, egos, lack of jurisdiction, disparate impact, incorporation, purposefully, appointment, nonresident, disparate, entities, collective action, named plaintiff, due process

Civil Procedure, Dismissal, Involuntary Dismissals, Motions, In Rem & Personal Jurisdiction, In Personam Actions, Challenges, Evidence, Burdens of Proof, Allocation, Burden Shifting, Defenses, Demurrers & Objections, Motions to Dismiss, Failure to State Claim, Pleadings, Complaints, Requirements for Complaint, Jurisdiction, Constitutional Limits, Due Process, Minimum Contacts, In Personam Actions, Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Jurisdiction Over Actions, Jurisdiction Over Actions, General Jurisdiction, Purposeful Availment, Labor & Employment Law, Employment Relationships, Business & Corporate Law, Shareholder Duties & Liabilities, Piercing the Corporate Veil, Alter Ego, Alter Ego, Corporate Formalities, Business & Corporate Compliance, Discrimination, Age Discrimination, Federal & State Interrelationships, Pleading & Practice, Service of Process, Service of Process, Methods of Service, Scope & Definitions, Special Proceedings, Class Actions, Class Members, Notice of Class Action, Class Members, Named Members, Certification of Classes, Waivers Under ADEA, Remedies, Injunctions, Remedies, Justiciability, Standing, Burdens of Proof, Constitutional Law, The Judiciary, Case or Controversy, Case or Controversy, Elements, Injury in Fact, Judgments, Declaratory Judgments, Disparate Impact, Statutory Application, Age Discrimination in Employment Act, Evidence, Defenses, Statistical Evidence, Disparate Treatment