Ward v. County of San Diego, et al

Filing 22

ORDER Granting Motion To Dismiss And Granting Leave To Amend 15 . Signed by Judge Roger T. Benitez on 3/26/2024. (ddf)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 9 10 WILLIAM HOWARD WARD, Plaintiff, 11 v. 12 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, a municipal entity; et al., 13 Defendants. 14 15 16 17 18 I. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 23-cv-1819-BEN (BLM) ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS AND GRANTING LEAVE TO AMEND INTRODUCTION Plaintiff William Howard Ward brings this action against Defendants the County 19 20 of San Diego (the “County”), and unnamed Doe defendants. Before the Court is the 21 County’s Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. The motion to dismiss is granted without 22 prejudice and Plaintiff is granted leave to amend the Complaint. 23 II. According to the Complaint, this case arises from events which began on 24 25 BACKGROUND September 4, 2022. 1 Plaintiff was arrested, but because of his physical and mental 26 27 28 For the purposes of a motion to dismiss, the Court assumes facts pleaded in the Complaint are true. Mazarek v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 519 F.3d 1025, 1031 (9th Cir. 2008). The Court is not making factual findings. 1 -123-cv-903-BEN (SBC) 1 condition, he was first taken to a hospital. Following hospital treatment, Plaintiff was 2 placed in a jail operated by the County of San Diego. While a pre-trial detainee in the 3 jail, Plaintiff alleges he suffered physical and mental injuries in violation of his 4 constitutional rights. He now sues under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, asserting claims for relief 5 against the County of San Diego and 50 unnamed Doe defendants. 6 The County moved to dismiss the Complaint under Federal Rule of Civil 7 Procedure 12(b)(6). Plaintiff now seeks leave to amend his Complaint. The County 8 objects to the procedure, noting it would have agreed to the filing of an amended 9 complaint had Plaintiff asked, but it does not object to the Plaintiff amending his 10 Complaint. See Reply in Supp. of Def’s Mot. to Dismiss, Dkt 20, at 1. 11 III. 12 LEGAL STANDARD Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2), a court should freely give leave 13 to amend a complaint when justice requires. Here, it is too late for Plaintiff to amend as 14 of right, but justice requires leave to amend be granted in view of the Defendant’s non- 15 opposition. Therefore, without addressing the merits of Plaintiff’s proposed 16 amendments, Plaintiff is given leave to file an amended complaint. 17 IV. CONCLUSION 18 1. The motion to dismiss is granted, without prejudice. 19 2. Plaintiff may file an amended complaint, within 21 days of this Order. 20 IT IS SO ORDERED. 21 DATED: March 26, 2024 HON. ROGER T. BENITEZ United States District Judge 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2- 23-cv-903-BEN (SBC)

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?