Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California considers Plaintiff Erik Pyle’s motion to electronically file documents and Defendant Glenn County Sheriff’s Department’s motion to dismiss the First Amended Complaint. The court grants the e-filing motion in part as to electronic service and denies it as to use of the CM/ECF system. It recommends granting the motion to dismiss for failure to plead individual liability or a sufficient Monell policy or custom, with leave to amend.
Holdings
- The First Amended Complaint failed to state a § 1983 claim because it did not allege facts connecting a named individual defendant to the alleged constitutional violations and did not allege facts showing that a municipal policy or custom caused the injuries.
- Dismissal should be recommended with leave to amend because it was conceivable that plaintiff could allege additional facts supporting a Monell claim.
- The court considered plaintiff's late opposition because of his pro se status and defendant's substantive response, but declined to consider the unauthorized sur-reply because plaintiff had no right to file it and no new argument or evidence justified it.
- Plaintiff's motion to e-file was denied insofar as it sought permission to use CM/ECF, but granted insofar as it sought electronic service and email notifications.
Questions Presented
- Whether the First Amended Complaint stated a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Glenn County Sheriff's Department and related municipal defendants.
- Whether the complaint adequately alleged individual participation or a causal connection by any named individual defendant.
- Whether the complaint adequately alleged a municipal policy or custom sufficient to support Monell liability.
- Whether dismissal should be with leave to amend.
- Whether plaintiff's late opposition and unauthorized sur-reply should be considered.
- Whether plaintiff should receive permission to use CM/ECF and electronic service.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (23)
- Faulkner v. ADT Security Services, 706 F.3d 1017, 1019 (9th Cir. 2013)(followed)
- Paulsen v. CNF Inc., 559 F.3d 1061, 1071 (9th Cir. 2009)(followed)
- Chambers v. Herrera, 78 F.4th 1100, 1104 (9th Cir. 2023)(followed)
- Garity v. APWU National Labor Organization, 828 F.3d 848, 854 (9th Cir. 2016)(followed)
- Lathus v. City of Huntington Beach, 56 F.4th 1238, 1243 (9th Cir. 2023)(followed)
- Broam v. Bogan, 320 F.3d 1023, 1026 n.2 (9th Cir. 2003)(followed)
- Mollett v. Netflix, Inc., 795 F.3d 1062, 1065 (9th Cir. 2015)(followed)
- Wilder v. Virginia Hospital Association, 496 U.S. 498, 508 (1990)(followed)
- Albright v. Oliver, 510 U.S. 266, 271 (1994)(followed)
- Florer v. Congregation Pidyon Shevuyim, N.A., 639 F.3d 916, 921 (9th Cir. 2011)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 23.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…