Granado v. City of Imperial et al

Filing 21

ORDER on Motions to Dismiss. The motions to dismiss (Docket nos. 4 and 16 ) are granted in part and denied in part. Granado must file an amended complaint that's consistent with this order by February 15, 2016. If he thinks he can amend his allegations to state a cognizable individual capacity claim against Best, he may do so in the amended complaint. Signed by Judge Larry Alan Burns on 2/2/16. (kas)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ERIC GRANADO,

12
13
14

CASE NO. 15cv435-LAB (PCL)
Plaintiff,

ORDER ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS

vs.
CITY OF IMPERIAL et al.,
Defendants.

15
16

Eric Granado alleges that he's a police officer in the City of Imperial and he has

17

served as president of the Imperial Police Officers Association starting in 2011. The

18

Association has voted that it lacked confidence in Miguel Colon as Chief of Police. Granado

19

maintains that in 2014 he reported to the City of Imperial that Colon had failed to investigate

20

an alleged incident involving on duty purchase and consumption of alcohol. In response,

21

Granado alleges, Colon retaliated against him and other officers that voted against him by,

22

among other things, pressuring Granado's supervisor to issue a poor job rating, forging the

23

supervisor's signature on a poor performance evaluation when the supervisor refused to

24

issue one, and denying his requests for interdepartment positions. Granado alleges that City

25

Manager Marlene Best learned of Colon's conduct and called a meeting about it in July

26

2014. He alleges that Colon and Best are vested with policy-making authority. He sued

27

Colon and Best in their individual and official capacities, the City of Imperial, and the Imperial

28

Police Department. (Docket no. 1.)
-1-

15cv435

1

Defendants seek dismissal of the 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim against the City of Imperial

2

arguing that Granado hasn't alleged any violation that was based on an official policy or

3

unofficial custom or practice. (Docket no. 4.) They seek dismissal of the claims against the

4

Imperial Police Department arguing it's not a proper defendant. (Id.) They seek dismissal

5

of Granado's § 1983 claims against Colon and Best arguing that his allegations against

6

Colon are too vague to state a claim, he alleges no facts to state a claim against Best, and

7

that he can't maintain an individual capacity case against them. (Docket no. 16.)

8

Motion to Dismiss Standard

9

A 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim challenges the legal sufficiency

10

of a complaint. Navarro v. Block, 250 F.3d 729, 732 (9th Cir. 2001). The Court must accept

11

all factual allegations as true and construe them in the light most favorable to Granado.

12

Cedars Sinai Med. Ctr. v. Nat'l League of Postmasters of U.S., 497 F.3d 972, 975 (9th Cir.

13

2007). To defeat the motions to dismiss, Granado's factual allegations need not be detailed,

14

but they must be sufficient to "raise a right to relief above the speculative level. . . ." Bell Atl.

15

Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). While the Court must draw all reasonable

16

inferences in Granado's favor, it need not "necessarily assume the truth of legal conclusions

17

merely because they are cast in the form of factual allegations." Warren v. Fox Family

18

Worldwide, Inc., 328 F.3d 1136, 1139 (9th Cir. 2003) (internal quotation marks omitted).

19
20

Discussion
City of Imperial

21

Defendants argue that the § 1983 claim against the City of Imperial should be

22

dismissed because Granado hasn't alleged a constitutional violation based on an official

23

policy or an unofficial custom or practice, as is necessary to establish liability under Monell

24

v. Dep't of Soc. Servs. of City of New York, 436 U.S. 658 (1978). (Docket no. 4 at 3–4.) But

25

where a city has delegated its authority to a city official, his or her official actions are

26

considered "edicts or acts [that] may fairly be said to represent official policy" for which the

27

municipality can be held liable. Monell, 436 U.S. at 694; see also Martinez v. City of

28

Imperial, 2016 WL 245514, at *4 (S.D. Cal. Jan. 21, 2016). Granado's allegations regarding
-2-

15cv435

1

the City of Imperial's delegation of authority to Colon and Best are sufficient to state a claim

2

for municipal liability. See Martinez, 2016 WL 245514, at *4. The motion to dismiss

3

Granado's § 1983 claim against the City of Imperial is DENIED.

4
5
6
7

Imperial Police Department
Granado doesn't dispute that the Imperial Police Department is an improper
defendant. The motion to dismiss Granado's claims against it is GRANTED.
Individual Capacity Claim Against Colon

8

Defendants contend that the § 1983 claim against Colon should be dismissed

9

because the complaint's allegations against him are "vague as to time." But taken in the light

10

most favorable to Granado, the complaint alleges enough facts to state a claim for

11

unconstitutional retaliation. The complaint includes facts regarding his allegedly protected

12

activity, Colon’s alleged retaliation, and dates for certain events. Colon can request any

13

additional dates he thinks he needs in discovery. The motion to dismiss the individual

14

capacity claim against Colon is DENIED.

15

Individual Capacity Claim Against Best

16

The only factual allegations regarding Best's involvement in the alleged retaliation

17

against Granado are that she became aware that "matters were coming to a head" and held

18

a meeting. (Docket no 1 at ¶ 17.) These allegations don't support a claim against Best. The

19

motion to dismiss the claim against Best is GRANTED, and the individual capacity claim

20

against her is DISMISSED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND.

21

Official Capacity Claims

22

"Official capacity suits [under § 1983] . . . generally represent only another way of

23

pleading an action against an entity of which an officer is an agent." Kentucky v. Graham,

24

473 U.S. 159, 165-166 (1985) (internal quotation marks omitted); see Brandon v. Holt, 469

25

U.S. 464, 472 (1985) (actions of department head in his official capacity akin to actions of

26

municipality itself). "If individuals are being sued in their official capacity as municipal

27

officials and the municipal entity itself is also being sued, then the claims against the

28

individuals are duplicative and should be dismissed." Ochoa v. City of Hayward, 2014 WL
-3-

15cv435

1

4088203, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 19, 2014) (internal brackets and quotation marks omitted).

2

Granado consents to the dismissal of his official capacity claims. (Docket no. 17 at 6 n.1.)

3

Thus, the motion to dismiss them is GRANTED.

4

Conclusion

5

The motions to dismiss (Docket nos. 4 and 16) are GRANTED IN PART AND

6

DENIED IN PART. Granado must file an amended complaint that's consistent with this order

7

by February 15, 2016. If he thinks he can amend his allegations to state a cognizable

8

individual capacity claim against Best, he may do so in the amended complaint.

9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: February 2, 2016

11
12

HONORABLE LARRY ALAN BURNS
United States District Judge

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-4-

15cv435