United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Jonesboro Division
motions to dismiss [Doc. Nos. 31, 36, 34] are granted.
Defendant Boyce's motion for a protective order [Doc. No.
42] is denied as moot. Plaintiff Liscomb's motion to
amend the amended complaint [Doc. No. 47] is denied as
the facts are somewhat difficult to understand, it appears
that plaintiff Blake Liscomb, a former employee of the
Lawrence County Sheriff's Office brings this lawsuit
against defendants Henry Boyce, the Prosecuting Attorney for
the Third Judicial District of Arkansas; Jeff Floyd; and Tony
Anglin. Liscomb alleges that Boyce retaliated against him
after Liscomb filed a lawsuit against the Sheriff's
Office seeking overtime pay. Specifically, Liscomb claims
that Boyce (1) prevented Liscomb from being hired for a
position on the Drug Task Force, and (2) improperly filed
criminal theft charges against Liscomb. Liscomb asserts that
Floyd and Anglin conspired with Boyce to falsely implicate
Liscomb in that criminal case. The facts, as alleged in the
complaint, are as follows:
was employed by the Sheriff's Office as a canine officer
between March 2010 and August 2013. Two years after his
termination in August 2013, Liscomb filed a lawsuit against
the Sheriff's Office and Lawrence County seeking overtime
pay. Liscomb v. Yates, Case No. 3:15-CV-00280-JLH,
ECF No. 1 (E.D. Ark. Sept. 11, 2015).
the lawsuit was pending, Liscomb met with Boyce concerning a
new position on the Drug Task Force. Boyce told Liscomb that
if the overtime lawsuit against the county was dismissed,
Liscomb would be hired for the position. Acting on this
promise, Liscomb agreed to settle the case. Boyce, however,
still refused to hire Liscomb after the settlement.
also charged Liscomb with criminal theft when an automotive
transmission worth $1, 200, belonging to defendant Floyd, was
found in a car allegedly owned by Liscomb. Liscomb asserts
that this criminal case was meritless and merely “an
attempt to intimidate the Plaintiff from pursuing his claims,
acting in concert with the Lawrence County Sheriff.”
Second Am. Compl., Doc. No. 28, ¶ 14. Boyce asked the
state police to inform his current and prospective employers
about the criminal charge and contacted the media to publish
the charging instruments.
defendants Floyd and Anglin conspired with Boyce to falsely
implicate Liscomb in the theft. At Floyd's urging, Anglin
trespassed on Liscomb's land to observe the allegedly
stolen transmission and later “present[ed] false
testimony simply to smear Plaintiff's name and his
lawsuit” at Liscomb's trial. Id. at ¶
59. Liscomb was ultimately acquitted.
asserts that defendants violated a number of his
constitutional and statutory rights, including those under
the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C.
section 201, et seq.; the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act
(“AMWA”), Ark. Code Ann. section 11-4-210, et
seq.; and the Arkansas Civil Rights Act
(“ACRA”), Ark. Code Ann. section 16-123-101,
et seq. He further alleges that defendants
conspired, in violation of 42 U.S.C. sections 1985 and 1986,
to falsify testimony in a criminal proceeding. Liscomb also
complains that defendants committed abuse of process,
malicious prosecution, and trespass.
12(b)(6) permits dismissal when the plaintiff fails to state
a claim upon which relief may be granted. To meet the
12(b)(6) standard, a complaint must allege sufficient facts
to entitle the plaintiff to the relief sought. See
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 663 (2009); Bell
Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 55 U.S. 544 (2007). Although
detailed factual allegations are not required, threadbare
recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by
mere conclusory statements, are insufficient. Iqbal,
556 U.S. at 663. In ruling on a motion to dismiss, all
well-plead allegations in the complaint must be accepted as
true and construed in the light most favorable to the
Rule 15(a) provides a liberal standard for amending
pleadings, denials of motions to amend are proper when the
proposed amendments would be futile. See Zutz v.
Nelson, 601 F.3d 842, 850 (8th Cir. 2010). An amendment
is futile if it could not survive a motion to dismiss,
meaning it does not contain sufficient facts to state a
plausible claim to relief. See Iqbal, 556 U.S. at
Claims Against Boyce
outset, Liscomb seeks leave to amend his complaint [Doc. No.
47] to allege with greater specificity that Boyce's
approval was necessary to be hired to the Drug Task Force.
Even if Boyce had ultimate authority over hiring for the Drug
Task Force, Liscomb's claims still cannot survive a