Marilyn Wagner, on behalf of Minor Child B.D. v. City of Newark, et al.

Wagner · United States District Court for the District of New Jersey · January 28, 2026 · No. No. 23-731 (SDW) (MAH)

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey granted the City of Newark and Police Chief Darnell Henry’s motions to dismiss Marilyn Wagner’s Second Amended Complaint. The court held that the wrongful-death and Survivor’s Act claims failed, and it dismissed the remaining claims because the Second Amended Complaint was substantially the same as the previously rejected pleading and did not state a claim for relief. The court declined to allow another amendment.

Court
United States District Court for the District of New Jersey
Writing for the Court
Susan D. Wigenton
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the District of New Jersey
Decision date
January 28, 2026
Docket number
No. 23-731 (SDW) (MAH)
Procedural posture
Defendants City of Newark and Police Chief Darnell Henry moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint. The court granted the motions.
Standard of review
On a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, the court accepts well-pleaded factual allegations as true, construes the complaint in the plaintiff's favor, disregards legal conclusions, and determines whether the facts plausibly show entitlement to relief under any reasonable reading of the complaint.
Precedential value
unpublished
Parties
Marilyn Wagner, on behalf of Minor Child B.D. v. City of Newark, Darnell Henry
Disposition
dismissed

Topics

motions to dismisscivil proceduresection 1983municipal liabilitywrongful death

Practice areas

civil rightsconstitutional lawcivil proceduremunicipal liabilitywrongful death

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the Second Amended Complaint plausibly stated a claim under the New Jersey Wrongful Death Act against the City and Chief Henry.
  2. Whether the Second Amended Complaint plausibly stated a claim under the New Jersey Survivor's Act against the City and Chief Henry.
  3. Whether the remaining claims against the City and Chief Henry should be dismissed because the Second Amended Complaint was materially identical to the previously dismissed First Amended Complaint and failed for the reasons stated in Wagner II.

Holdings

  1. The Wrongful Death Act claim was inadequately pleaded because the Second Amended Complaint did not allege that B.D. was dependent on Dorsey for support at the time of Dorsey's death, and the complaint did not establish an underlying basis for liability.
  2. The Survivor's Act claim failed because Plaintiff's remaining claims did not establish a basis for liability.
  3. The remaining claims against the City and Henry were dismissed because the Second Amended Complaint was practically the same as the First Amended Complaint and failed for the reasons previously stated in Wagner II.

Key quotations

When deciding a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, federal courts “must accept all factual allegations in the complaint as true, construe the complaint in the light favorable to the plaintiff,” and determine “whether [the] plaintiff may be entitled to relief under any reasonable reading of the complaint.” (Section III)
For the reasons stated above, Defendants’ Motions are GRANTED. (Section V)

Factual background

On New Year's Eve 2020, Newark detectives responded to what one detective believed were gunshots after the officers had observed and heard fireworks during their shift. Detective Simpkins exited an unmarked vehicle with his handgun drawn, bumped into Carl Dorsey, aimed at Dorsey's chest, and shot him approximately three seconds after exiting the vehicle. Dorsey died after suffering a gunshot wound to his torso, and officers allegedly failed to provide medical care while he lay bleeding on the sidewalk.

Procedural history

Wagner initially filed suit in New Jersey Superior Court against the City, the Newark Police Department, Henry, and Detective Simpkins; the City removed the action to federal court. The court granted earlier motions to dismiss in May 2024 and February 2025, allowing one final amendment. Plaintiff filed the Second Amended Complaint, which the court found was practically identical to the First Amended Complaint, and the court dismissed the remaining claims against the City and Henry.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…