Federal Judge Dismisses Emotional Distress Lawsuit Against Atlantic Health Systems for Mocking Stutter

NEWARK, N.J. — A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by a New Jersey man who claimed an Atlantic Health Systems employee mocked his speech impediment during a phone conversation, causing severe emotional distress.

In a decision issued May 15, U.S. District Judge Susan D. Wigenton granted Atlantic Health Systems’ motion to dismiss the complaint filed by plaintiff Paul Cuff in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.

According to court records, Cuff alleged that on or about March 16, 2025, he was speaking by telephone with an unidentified Atlantic Health employee identified in the lawsuit as “Robin Roe 1” when the employee allegedly mocked his stutter in front of other workers. Cuff stated the speech impediment was caused by a traumatic brain injury.

The lawsuit claimed the employee knew about the condition and intentionally ridiculed him, resulting in psychological injuries, emotional suffering, and permanent disabilities requiring ongoing medical treatment.

Cuff’s Second Amended Complaint asserted four causes of action, including intentional infliction of emotional distress and negligent infliction of emotional distress against both the unnamed employee and Atlantic Health Systems.

Just reported, Mikie Sherrill Pushes to Roll Back SNAP Fraud Protections and Work Requirements.

Atlantic Health moved to dismiss the lawsuit in October 2025, arguing the allegations failed to meet the legal standard required under federal pleading rules.

In reviewing the motion, Judge Wigenton outlined the legal framework courts must use when evaluating motions to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), which requires courts to determine whether a complaint contains sufficient factual allegations to support a plausible legal claim.

The opinion noted that while courts must accept factual allegations as true at the dismissal stage, legal conclusions unsupported by factual detail are not entitled to the same presumption.

The ruling focused on whether the alleged conduct — mocking a speech impediment during a phone conversation — rose to the level necessary to support claims for emotional distress under New Jersey law.

Continuing coverage, Exploding Porta-potty Draws State Agencies to Lakewood.