Lynn v. State of California

Filing 4

ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 8/14/2013 ORDERING 3 Motion for TRO is DENIED; Plaintiff's 2 Motion to Proceed IFP is GRANTED; and this action is DISMISSED with prejudice. CASE CLOSED. (Waggoner, D)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 ROBERT LYNN, NO. CIV. S-13-1657 TLN/EFB 11 Plaintiff, 12 v. O R D E R 13 THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Defendant. 14 / 15 Presently before the court is an application for a temporary 16 17 restraining order 18 proceeding in pro per. (ECF No. 3.) Plaintiff 19 (“TRO”) alleges that filed he by sold plaintiff his home Robert in San Lynn, Diego, 20 California in 2000 at a loss, and is now being improperly assessed 21 taxes on the sale by defendant State of California. (Complaint, ECF 22 No. 1.) According to the complaint, “On August 5, 2013, Plaintiff 23 was 24 $2292.72 dollars [sic] from Plaintiff’s checking account. More than 25 61% 26 Defendant has no authority to seize Plaintiff’s Social Security, notified of by Plaintiff’s Plaintiff’s monthly bank income 1 that is defendant from would Social seize Security. 1 but defendant will do this without any notice to Plaintiff in 2 blatant disregard of the U.S. Constitution.” (Id. ¶ 12.) Plaintiff 3 alleges that the seizure of funds from his checking account is an 4 unlawful taking in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. (Id. 5 ¶ 1.) 6 Plaintiff seeks a TRO directing plaintiff’s bank not to 7 transfer any funds from his checking account to satisfy the levy, 8 and if the funds are so transferred, directing defendant to return 9 them within twenty-four hours of receipt. 10 From the face of the complaint, it appears that the federal 11 courts lack any subject matter jurisdiction over this matter. If 12 the levy is illegitimate, plaintiff’s remedy appears to lie with 13 the 14 procedures, in lieu of temporary restraining orders, for halting 15 and/or reversing levies of funds. See, generally, Cal. Code Civ. 16 Proc. §§ 703.510-703.610 (“Procedure for Claiming Exemptions After 17 Levy”); see also Cal. Code Civ. Proc. §§ 704.010-704.210 (“Exempt 18 Property”). The court also notes that most California counties 19 maintain Area Agencies on Aging to assist senior citizens with 20 emergencies such as that outlined by plaintiff. Superior Court of California. California law provides 21 Accordingly, the court hereby orders as follows: 22 [1] 23 DENIED. 24 [2] Plaintiff’s application to proceed without prepayment of 25 fees (ECF No. 2) is GRANTED. 26 Plaintiff’s request for a temporary restraining order is //// 2 1 [3] This action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 2 IT IS SO ORDERED. 3 DATED: August 14, 2013. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 3