James B. Herrera v. Maddox Management, LLC

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of New Mexico denies the defendant’s motion to dismiss based on Colorado River abstention and res judicata, and sets aside the entry of default while denying default judgment. The court orders the plaintiff to show cause why the action should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim, concluding that the amended complaint’s Fair Housing Act, due process, and Rehabilitation Act allegations are insufficiently factual and plausible. The court also declines to consider supplemental evidence filed outside the amended complaint in evaluating the pleading.

Holdings

1. Good cause exists to set aside the entry of default because Defendant's response was timely, any delay was not willful or in bad faith due to conflicting waiver of service forms, Plaintiff was not prejudiced, and Defendant presented a meritorious defense in its motion to dismiss.
2. Colorado River abstention is not warranted because the federal and state cases are not parallel (federal case includes a due process claim not asserted in state court), and alternatively, the Colorado River factors do not weigh in favor of abstention.
3. Plaintiff fails to state a plausible Fair Housing Act claim because he does not plausibly allege discrimination based on disability, fails to allege causation between his disability or protected activity and the adverse action, and does not allege facts supporting retaliation.
4. The procedural due process claim is barred by Rooker-Feldman doctrine because Plaintiff complains of injuries caused by state court judgment and seeks to challenge that judgment. Alternatively, Plaintiff fails to allege Defendant was a state actor or acted under color of state law.
5. Plaintiff fails to state a plausible Rehabilitation Act claim because he does not plausibly allege facts suggesting he is disabled, does not allege Defendant is a program or activity receiving federal financial assistance, and fails to allege he was denied benefits because of disability.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Defendant's Motion to Dismiss based on Colorado River abstention should be granted
2. Whether Defendant's Motion to Dismiss based on res judicata should be granted
3. Whether Plaintiff's Fair Housing Act claim states a plausible claim for relief
4. Whether Plaintiff's Fourteenth Amendment procedural due process claim states a plausible claim
5. Whether Plaintiff's Rehabilitation Act claim states a plausible claim
6. Whether default should be set aside and default judgment denied

Disposition

other