Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Whitney v. City of Tacoma, C19-5582 BHS. (2020)

Court: District Court, D. Washington Number: infdco20200121c26 Visitors: 23
Filed: Jan. 14, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 14, 2020
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION BENJAMIN H. SETTLE , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation ("R&R") of the Honorable Michelle L. Peterson, United States Magistrate Judge, Dkt. 46. Plaintiff Katherine Whitney ("Plaintiff") brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983 seeking relief for an alleged assault occurring at her residence, which she was referred to by a nonprofit organization operating in Pierce County. Dkt. 1-1
More

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation ("R&R") of the Honorable Michelle L. Peterson, United States Magistrate Judge, Dkt. 46.

Plaintiff Katherine Whitney ("Plaintiff") brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 seeking relief for an alleged assault occurring at her residence, which she was referred to by a nonprofit organization operating in Pierce County. Dkt. 1-1. On October 19, 2019, this Court issued an order dismissing Plaintiff's complaint but granting her leave to amend on all but one claim. Dkt. 32.

On October 30, 2019, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint. Dkt. 34. On December 19, 2019, Judge Peterson issued an R&R recommending that Plaintiff's amended complaint be dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim. Dkt. 46. The R&R required any objections be filed within 14 days. Id. at 14.

On December 23, 2019, Plaintiff filed a 72-page miscellaneous document in support of returning the matter to Pierce County Superior Court for the State of Washington, which is the court where Plaintiff originally filed this action. Dkt. 47. Also on December 23, 2019, Plaintiff filed a disclosure of expert witnesses. Dkt. 48.

Plaintiff's 72-page document in support of remanding the matter to Pierce County Superior Court fails to make any coherent objection to any conclusion in the R&R. Dkt. 47.1 Plaintiff merely repeats her allegations which the R&R found insufficient to state a cognizable claim against any defendant. Dkts. 46, 47. The Court agrees with the R&R's conclusion regarding the deficiencies in Plaintiff's amended complaint after Plaintiff was provided leave to amend.

Therefore, the Court having considered the R&R, Plaintiff's letter in support of remand, and the remaining record, does hereby find and order as follows:

(1) The R&R is ADOPTED; (2) Defendant's motions to dismiss, Dkts. 37, 39, and 42, are GRANTED; (3) Plaintiff's case is DISMISSED with prejudice; and (4) The Clerk shall enter JUDGMENT and close the case.

FootNotes


1. Of note, however, are documents that appear to show that two employees of the housing organization were criminally charged in Pierce County Superior Court with Plaintiff identified as the named victim. Dkt. 47 at 25, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35. Regardless, these documents do not alter the R&R's conclusion that Plaintiff has failed to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against any defendant named in this suit, which does not include the two employees.
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer