Summary
This is a federal district court order ruling on a defendant's motion to dismiss a pro se civil rights complaint alleging excessive force by a tribal police officer. The court denied the motion regarding subject matter jurisdiction and tribal sovereign immunity, finding the defendant was sued in her individual capacity. However, the court granted the motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, concluding that the tribal officer did not act under color of state law as required for a Section 1983 action. The complaint was dismissed with prejudice.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether a tribal police officer sued in her personal capacity is entitled to tribal sovereign immunity under Rule 12(b)(1).
- Whether the plaintiff’s complaint states a claim under Rule 12(b)(6) and therefore survives a motion to dismiss.
Holdings
- The motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(1) is denied because the officer is sued in her personal capacity and therefore not entitled to tribal sovereign immunity.
- The motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) is granted and the complaint is dismissed with prejudice because it fails to allege that the officer acted under color of state law.
Key quotations
“The Court’s denial of the motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) does not mean this action proceeds because the Court has granted Defendant’s motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), which results in a dismissal of the action.”
Factual background
On May 2, 2023, while on the Tule River Indian Reservation, plaintiff was fired upon with non‑lethal rubber bullets by tribal police officer Kaelin Manuel. Plaintiff alleges the officer acted without state authority and violated his Fourth Amendment rights.
Procedural history
Plaintiff, a county jail inmate, filed a §1983 action alleging excessive force by tribal police officer. Defendant filed motions to dismiss for lack of subject‑matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim. The court considered the motions and issued an order.