Lozano v. Suffolk Superior Court et al

Filing 26

Judge F. Dennis Saylor, IV: ORDER entered. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re: 13 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim, Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction.(Pezzarossi, Lisa)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
_______________________________________
)
MARIO R. LOZANO,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
SUFFOLK SUPERIOR COURT;
)
TRANSCRIPTION SERVICES
)
ADMINISTRATION; WELLS FARGO
)
BANK, N.A.; and FREDDIE MAC,
)
)
Defendants.
)
_______________________________________)

Civil No.
14-13123-FDS

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
SAYLOR, J.
This is an action arising out of state-court litigation. Plaintiff Mario R. Lozano,
proceeding pro se, alleges that the defendants violated his civil rights and a Massachusetts state
law by tampering with or otherwise altering certain transcripts of state court proceedings.
Defendants Suffolk Superior Court and the Office of Transcription Services have moved to
dismiss the complaint on jurisdictional grounds.1
Under the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution, “nonconsenting States
may not be sued by private individuals in federal court.” Bd. of Trustees of Univ. of Ala. v.
Garrett, 531 U.S. 356, 363 (2001). The guarantee applies equally to any agency or department
of the state. Pennhurst State School & Hosp. v. Halderman, 465 U.S. 89, 100 (1984). Suffolk
1

Plaintiff filed both an original complaint and an amended complaint, and both defendants moved to
dismiss each complaint in turn. Plaintiff filed the amended complaint nearly four months after the original
complaint, without having moved to amend. Accordingly, this memorandum and order applies to the first complaint
and the corresponding motion to dismiss.

Superior Court and the Office of Transcription Services are both arms of the state, and neither
has consented to suit.2 Therefore, neither can properly be subject to the jurisdiction of this
Court.
Accordingly, the motion to dismiss by defendants Suffolk Superior Court and Office of
Transcription Services is GRANTED.
So ordered.

Dated: January 8, 2015

2

/s/ F. Dennis Saylor
F. Dennis Saylor IV
United States District Judge

Lozano’s complaint directly identifies the Office of Transcription Services as an agency of the
Massachusetts state government. Further, it does not allege any form of consent by either Suffolk Superior Court or
the Office of Transcription Services.