Russell et al v. United States of America et al

Filing 30

CORRECTION OF ORDER #27 by Judge Thelton E. Henderson granting #23 Motion to Dismiss. (tehlc4, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/6/2009)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 SAKIA RUSSELL ET AL., Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ET AL., Defendants. NO. C 08-5651 TEH CORRECTED ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION AND PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION TO STRIKE IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA United States District Court 11 For the Northern District of California 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 The Court is in receipt of Defendant's motion and partial motion to dismiss and motion to strike, and Plaintiffs' statement of non-opposition to those motions. In light of the parties' agreement that these motions should be granted, and the Court's consideration of the legal arguments on these matters, the motion is hereby GRANTED. Plaintiffs' second cause of action for the intentional tort of deceit is barred by the "intentional tort" exception to the FTCA and is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice. See 28 U.S.C. § 2680(h). Plaintiff's claims against the United States Coast Guard and Coast Guard Maintenance and Logistics Command Pacific are hereby DISMISSED with prejudice because the United States of America is the only proper defendant in this FTCA action. See 28 U.S.C. § 2679(a). Finally, Plaintiffs have demanded a jury trial. There is no right to a jury trial in any FTCA action and the demand for a jury trial is hereby STRICKEN. See 28 U.S.C. §2402. Trial in this action // 1 shall be before the Court and shall commence on the date previously set by the Court . 2 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 5 Dated: 6 7 8 9 10 August 6, 2009 THELTON E. HENDERSON, JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT United States District Court 11 For the Northern District of California 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?