Walker v. Southern Arizona Legal Aid, Inc. et al

Filing 12

ORDER Denying Plaintiff's Motion for Service 11 ; Amended Complaint is dismissed for failure to state a claim. Judgment to be entered. Clerk to send copy of this Order to the Judges of th US District Court for the District of AZ in the following cases: CV 07-478-RCC, CV 08-134 CKJ, CV 08-377 RCC, CV 08-412 BPV, CV 08-413 RCC. Signed by Judge David C Bury on 10/6/08. (LSI, ) Modified on 10/8/2008 to add Written Opinion (LSI, ).

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

WO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) v. ) Southern Arizona Legal Aid, Inc., Anthony ) Young, Sharon Rauseo, Bruce Plenk, Peter ) ) Akmajian, and Pamela Brown, ) ) Defendants. _______________________________________ ) Janice Walker, CV 08-310 TUC DCB

ORDER

Plaintiff was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and the Court screened her Complaint on September 8, 2008. The Court dismissed the Complaint for failure to state a claim and granted her leave to file an Amended Complaint. On September 29, 2008, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint and a Motion for Service by the U.S. Marshal. Plaintiff's Amended Complaint is identical to the Complaint this Court dismissed, except for the addition of allegations that "the Arizona Foundation for Legal Services and Education and Legal Services Corporation provide funding for SALA, along with overseeing compliance with their Grievance Procedures, which is legally necessary to receive this funding." (Amended Complaint at 1.) Plaintiff also added the following charge: ". . . Both State and Federal funding laws that these organizations oversee compliance of were being violated. Both organizations were kept informed of the continuing problems at SALA and their refusal to adhere to Grievance Procedures to hold a Grievance Hearing that I could participate in, which funding law requires. Both organizations allowed this illegal conduct to continue for months and have refused to ever address the illegal refusal of SALA to allow me to participate in a Grievance Hearing. According to law, SALA

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

funding should be cut off from both organizations, but hasn't been, making these organizations both guilty of legal violations in addition to SALA." (Amended Complaint at 12.) As this Court explained in its screening Order, Plaintiff's allegations fail to support her disability discrimination claim because she merely alleges conduct that might be legal malpractice. Plaintiff fails to allege a specific accommodation that she requested and was denied by the Defendants. Her allegations that Defendant Plank made sexual innuendoes is insufficient to support a claim of sexual harassment or gender discrimination. Her

constitutional claims fail because there is no evidence that the Defendants were state actors or that their conduct may have been anything more than rudeness or mere negligence. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Plaintiff's Motion for Service by the U.S. Marshal (document 11) is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Amended Complaint is dismissed for failure to state a claim. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall enter Judgment accordingly. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall send a copy of this Order to the judges of the United States District Court for the District of Arizona in the following cases: CV 07-478 TUC RCC, CV 08-134 TUC CKJ, CV 08-377 TUC RCC, CV 08-412 TUC BPV, and CV 08-413 TUC RCC. DATED this 6th day of October, 2008.

copy to RCC, CKJ, BPV on 10/6/08 by cjs

2