Opinion
Civil Action 3:21-CV-283
06-14-2022
JOSE ENRIQUE CRUZ, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF POTTSVILLE, et al., Defendants,
Schwab, Magistrate Judge
ORDER
Robert D. Mariani, United States District Judge
AND NOW, THIS 14th DAY OF JUNE 2022, having reviewed Magistrate Judge Susan E. Schwab's Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) (Doc. 40) for clear error or manifest injustice, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. The R&R (Doc. 40) is ADOPTED for the reasons set forth therein.
2. Defendants' City of Pottsville, Pottsville Police Department, Charles Webber, and Michael Messner Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint Pursuant to F.R.C.P. 12(b)(6) (Doc. 23) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.
As noted in the R&R, [there appears to be some confusion about whether the defendant's name is spelled Messer or Messner. Although his name appears as Messer on the docket and within the caption of the briefs, he is also referred to as Messner throughout the body of the briefs. For the sake of consistency, we will refer to the defendant as Messer throughout this Report and Recommendation. (Doc. 40 at 2 n. 1.) In this Order, the Court will refer to this Defendant as Messer other than in the title of the motion to dismiss (Doc. 23).
3. Defendant Rooney's Motion to Dismiss the Complaint (Doc. 24) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.
4. The Motions are GRANTED as follows:
a. Plaintiffs' claims against Defendants Rooney, Webber, and Messer in their official capacities are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;
b. All claims against Defendant Pottsville Police Department are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and Defendant Pottsville Police Department is DISMISSED from this action;
c. Plaintiffs Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE against all Defendants;
d. Plaintiffs Eighth Amendment claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE against all Defendants;
e. Plaintiffs request for punitive damages against the City of Pottsville is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;
f. Plaintiffs ADA claims against Defendants Rooney, Webber, and Messer are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;
g. Plaintiffs ADA claim against Defendant City of Pottsville is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE;
h. Plaintiffs claims against Defendant City of Pottsville brought pursuant to Monell v. Dep't of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978), are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE;
i. Plaintiffs request for declaratory judgment is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE;
j. Plaintiffs request for injunctive relief is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
5. The Motions are DENIED as follows:
a. Pottsville Defendants' Motion is DENIED as it relates to Plaintiffs allegedly unlawful seizure under the Fourth Amendment against Defendants Messer and Webber;
b. Pottsville Defendants' Motion is DENIED as it relates to Plaintiffs excessive force claim under the Fourth Amendment against Defendants Messer and Webber;
c. Defendants' Motions are DENIED as they relate to Plaintiffs state law claims;
d. Pottsville Defendants' Motion is DENIED as it relates to Plaintiffs request for punitive damages against Defendants Webber and Messer.
Defendant Rooney does not seek dismissal of Plaintiff's Fourth Amendment unlawful seizure claim. (See Doc. 40 at 15 n.5.) Because Defendant Pottsville Police Department is dismissed from this action, “Pottsville Defendants” are Defendants Webber, Messer, and the City of Pottsville. (See Doc. 40 at 15 n.5.)
Defendant Rooney does not seek dismissal of Plaintiff's excessive force claim. (See Doc. 40 at 20 n.6.)
Defendant Rooney does not seek dismissal of Plaintiff's request for punitive damages. (See Doc. 40 at 41 and Docs. 24, 26.)
6. Based on the foregoing, the following claims and requests for relief set out in Plaintiffs Complaint (Doc. 1) go forward:
a. Count I for unlawful seizure under the Fourth Amendment against Defendants Rooney, Messer, and Webber;
b. Count II for excessive force under the Fourth Amendment against Defendants Rooney, Messer, and Webber;
c. Count V, Plaintiffs state law claims, against Defendants Rooney, Messer, an Webber.
d. Plaintiffs request for compensatory damages;
e. Plaintiffs request for punitive damages against Defendants Rooney, Messer, and Webber.
Plaintiff's claim for unlawful seizure against Defendant Pottsville is construed as a Monell claim which is being dismissed without prejudice.
Plaintiff's claim for excessive force against Defendant Pottsville is construed as a Monell claim which is being dismissed without prejudice.
Plaintiff's Complaint alleges that “the conduct of the police officers constitute [sic] false arrest and imprisonment, assault & battery, malicious prosecution, negligence under the laws of the State of Pennsylvania.” (Doc. 1 at 4c.)
7. Plaintiff is granted leave to amend the following claims:
a. Plaintiffs ADA claim against Defendant City of Pottsville (see Doc. 40 at 3538);
b. Plaintiffs claims against Defendant City of Pottsvile brought pursuant to Monell v. Dep't of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978), for unlawful seizure under the Fourth Amendment and excessive force under the Fourth Amendment (see Doc. 40 at 25-29);
c. Plaintiffs request for declaratory judgment (see Doc. 40 at 38-40);
d. Plaintiffs request for injunctive relief (see Doc. 40 at 40).
8. If Plaintiff chooses to file an amended complaint, he must do so no later than July 15, 2022.
An amended complaint must include the claims and requests for relief set out in paragraph 6 which go forward following disposition of Defendants motions to dismiss and any claims and/or relief identified in paragraph 7 which Plaintiff wishes to amend.
9. This matter is REMANDED to Magistrate Judge Schwab for further pretrial management.