Ganus v. Alabama And Gulf Coast Railway LLC

Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
MICHELLE L. GANUS, as personal
representative of the Estate of Michael
Fisher Ganus,
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff, 	)
)
vs. 	) 	CIV. ACT. NO. 1:23-cv-103-TFM-MU
)
ALABAMA AND GULF COAST
RAILWAY, LLC,
)
)
)
Defendant. 	)
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On February 6, 2024, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation which
recommends the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 4, filed 3/31/23) be denied. See Doc. 29.
Defendant timely filed objections (Doc. 30) and Plaintiff timely filed a response to the objections
(Doc. 31). The Report and Recommendation and underlying motions are ripe for review.
The Court looks to the original motion to dismiss and objections. 	The Court notes that
most cases relied upon by the Defendant are ones where the Court was reviewing a motion for
summary judgment or after a trial on the merits. While there are a few cases that rely upon the
motion to dismiss standard, some also offered Plaintiff the opportunity to amend in lieu of
dismissal. 	Regardless, the Court has reviewed the complaint in this case and agrees with the
Magistrate Judge in the findings that Plaintiff has sufficiently pled under the Rule 8 standard as
contemplated and discussed in by Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) and Bell Atlantic Corp.
v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007). There is no heightened pleading standard required in a Federal
Employers’ Liability Act (“FELA”) case. Therefore, Defendant’s objections are OVERRULED.
Nothing about this holding precludes Defendant from raising the issues at the summary judgment
Case 1:23-cv-00103-TFM-MU Doc# 32 Filed 03/06/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID#
<pageID>

Page 2 of 2
stage after a more robust record has been developed.
Therefore, after due and proper consideration of the issues raised, and a de novo
determination of those portions of the recommendation to which objection is made, the Report and
Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. 38) is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 4) is DENIED.
DONE and ORDERED this 6th day of March, 2024.
/s/Terry F. Moorer
TERRY F. MOORER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 1:23-cv-00103-TFM-MU Doc# 32 Filed 03/06/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID#
<pageID>