Galindo et al v. Tassio et al

Filing 112

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd denying 101 Motion to Amend 1 Complaint. (hrllc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/17/2014)

1

*E-Filed: July 17, 2014*

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

For the Northern District of California

NOT FOR CITATION

8

United States District Court

7

SAN JOSE DIVISION

11

CELINA GALINDO, ET AL.,
Plaintiffs,

12
v.

No. C13-00105 HRL
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’
MOTION TO AMEND

13
LEE TASSIO, ET AL.,

[Re: Docket No. 101]

14
15
16

Defendants.
____________________________________/
Plaintiffs move for leave to file a first amended complaint based on the Ninth Circuit’s

17

recent holding in Chaudry v. City of Los Angeles that “California’s prohibition against pre-death

18

pain and suffering damages . . . does not apply to § 1983 claims where the decedent’s death was

19

caused by the violation of federal law,” Chaudry, 751 F.3d 1096 (9th Cir. 2014). See First Am.

20

Compl., Dkt. No. 111. In an interim order, while expressing some doubt that amendment was even

21

necessary to recover damages for pre-death pain and suffering, the Court nevertheless ordered

22

Plaintiffs to file its proposed first amended complaint as required by Civil L.R. 10-1. See Inter

23

Order re: Pl.’s Mot. Leave Am., Dkt. No. 110. In addition to expressly seeking damages for pre-

24

death pain and suffering, Plaintiffs’ proposed first amended complaint adds additional prayers for

25

relief unrelated to the Chaudry holding and not addressed in its motion. It also continues to assert a

26

§ 1983 claim based on violation of the 14th Amendment, on which this Court previously granted

27

summary judgment for Defendant. Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ proposed pleading is unacceptable, and

28

their motion to amend is DENIED. However, the Court stands by its initial assessment and finds

1

that Plaintiffs’ original complaint, which remains the operative pleading in this case, is sufficient to

2

support recovery for pre-death pain and suffering as allowed by Chaudry. See Complaint for

3

Damages, Dkt. No. 1.

4
5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: July 17, 2014
HOWARD R. LLOYD
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

7
8
9

For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2

1

C13-00105 Notice will be electronically mailed to:

2

Dale Kristopher Galipo [e-mail], [e-mail],
[e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail],
[e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail],
[e-mail], [e-mail]

3
4
5

Jaime Alejandro Leanos
[e-mail]

[e-mail], [e-mail],

6

Nora Valerie Frimann

7

Paul Francis Caputo

8

Randolph S. Hom

9

Counsel are responsible for distributing copies of this document to co-counsel who have not
registered for e-filing under the court’s CM/ECF program.

[e-mail]
[e-mail], [e-mail]

[e-mail], [e-mail]

For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3