# Brown

> District Court, E.D. Arkansas · October 21, 2025

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11175197

## Case

- **Full name:** Tanya Brown v. Area Agency on Aging of Southeast Arkansas, Inc.
- **Court:** District Court, E.D. Arkansas
- **Decided:** October 21, 2025
- **Opinion:** 100trialcourt
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11175197

## Opinion text

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
CENTRAL DIVISION

TANYA BROWN PLAINTIFF

V. 4:24CV001098 JM

AREA AGENCY ON AGING
OF SOUTHEAST ARKANSAS, INC. DEFENDANTS

ORDER
Pending is Defendant’s motion to dismiss. (Docket # 20). Plaintiff has filed a response
and Defendant has filed a reply. The motion is ripe for consideration.
On December 13, 2024, Plaintiff Tanya Brown (Plaintiff) filed her Complaint
against Defendants Area on Aging and Billy Ray Biggs, asserting claims of race and age
discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2
et seq. (Title VII); 42 U.S.C. § 1981, the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States
Constitution; and 28 U.S.C. § 2201.
On May 2, 2025 the Court entered an order granting in part and denying in part
Defendants’ first motion to dismiss. The Court dismissed all of Plaintiff’s claims except her
claim alleging race discrimination and ordered Plaintiff to file an Amended Complaint setting
forth additional facts to support that claim. Plaintiff filed her Amended Complaint on May 19,
2025. Defendant now moves to dismiss Plaintiff’s race discrimination claim pursuant to Rule
12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Standard of Review
To survive a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, the complaint “must contain sufficient
factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’ ” Ashcroft
v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570). Although “specific facts
are not necessary,” the plaintiff must allege facts sufficient to “give fair notice of what
the...claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.” Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 93 (2007)
(quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). A plaintiff’s obligation to provide the “grounds”
of his “entitlement to relief” requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic

recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do.” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555. A
complaint “must contain either direct or inferential allegations respecting all the material
elements necessary to sustain recovery under some viable legal theory.” Id. at 562. This standard
“simply calls for enough fact[s] to raise a reasonable expectation that discovery will reveal
evidence of [the claim or element].” Id. at 556. The issue is not whether the plaintiff will
ultimately prevail, but whether the plaintiff is entitled to present evidence in support of his
claim.” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556.
The purpose of a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure is to test the legal sufficiency of the complaint. When considering a Rule 12(b)(6)

motion, the Court must assume the factual allegations of the complaint to be true and construe
them in favor of the plaintiff. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 326–27(1989). The Court is not
bound to accept as true a legal conclusion couched as a factual allegation. Twombly, 550 U.S. at
555.
Discussion
Defendant claims that Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint fails to state facts sufficient to
support her race discrimination claim. Plaintiff argues that her amended complaint states
sufficient facts to support her claim. The Court has reviewed the amended complaint and finds
that it contains sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a plausible claim for race
discrimination.
Conclusion
For these reasons, Defendant’s motion to dismiss (docket # 20) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 21* day of October, 2025.

James M. Moody |
United States District Judge

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11175197. Public record. Not legal advice.