Elliott v. The Department of Veterens Affairs
Filing
5
ORDER GRANTING PERMISSION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS AND DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 4/2/14. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/2/2014)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
12
VANCE S. ELLIOT,
Plaintiff,
v.
13
14
15
16
THE DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS,
No. C 14-80009 RS
ORDER GRANTING PERMISSION
TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS
AND DISMISSING COMPLAINT
WITH LEAVE TO AMEND
Defendant.
____________________________________/
17
18
In January 2014, plaintiff filed a complaint alleging slander against the Department of
19
Veterans Affairs. In an order issued January 27, 2014, Elliot’s request to proceed in forma pauperis
20
was denied because his complaint was largely illegible. (ECF No. 3). Plaintiff then lodged an
21
amended complaint on February 4, 2014. (ECF No. 4). While parts of the new complaint are still
22
difficult to read, the document is sufficiently legible to communicate the legal theory underpinning
23
Elliot’s claim. Elliot, a veteran of the Korean War, met with a psychiatrist employed at a VA
24
medical facility. According to the complaint, the VA psychiatrist diagnosed Elliot with
25
schizophrenia. She then entered his diagnosis into the VA medical database, “from which it could
26
be retrieved by anyone keying into his/her computer the last 4 digits of plaintiff’s Social Security
27
Number[.]” (Compl. ¶ 3). This, Elliot claims, constitutes the tort of slander.
28
1
When a federal employee acts within the scope of his or her employment and commits a tort,
2
any relief for that tort must be sought against the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act,
3
28 U.S.C. §§ 2671, et seq. Before a claimant can assert an FTCA claim in federal court, he must
4
first exhaust administrative remedies. § 2675(a); McNeil v. United States, 508 U.S. 106, 113
5
(1993). In particular, he must present the claim “in writing to the appropriate Federal agency within
6
two years after such claim accrues.” § 2401(b). If the agency denies the claim in writing, the
7
claimant can then file an FTCA action in federal court. Id. He must do so, however, within six
8
months of the administrative denial. Id.
First, the complaint pleads no facts indicating that Elliot exhausted his administrative remedies
11
For the Northern District of California
Plaintiff has apparently failed to comply with the procedural requirements of the FTCA.
10
United States District Court
9
before the VA. If he presented a claim in writing to the agency, no legible portion of his complaint
12
indicates as much. Second, even if Elliot filed an administrative claim with the VA, relief would be
13
barred unless said claim was lodged by May 2012. Third, assuming he did file a timely complaint
14
with the VA, this federal lawsuit would nonetheless be time-barred unless it was filed within six
15
months of the VA’s written denial of his administrative claim. Because the complaint contains no
16
suggestion that Elliot exhausted his administrative remedies in a timely fashion, it must be
17
dismissed. See Dyniewicz v. United States, 742 F.2d 484, 485 (9th Cir. 1984).
18
Plaintiff is granted leave to amend his complaint to the extent he can plead facts indicating
19
that he satisfied the FTCA’s procedural requirements. Any amended complaint must be filed within
20
thirty (30) days of the date of this order. In the meantime, Elliot’s request to proceed in forma
21
pauperis is granted.
22
23
IT IS SO ORDERED.
24
25
26
Dated: 4/2/14
RICHARD SEEBORG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
27
28
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT A HARD COPY OF THIS ORDER WAS MAILED TO:
Vance S. Elliott
640 Eddy Street, #219
San Francisco, CA 94109
DATED: 4/2/14
7
8
/s/ Chambers Staff
Chambers of Judge Richard Seeborg
9
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
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?