Davis v. City of Kansas City, Missouri et al
ORDER denying 15 motion for judgment on the pleadings. Signed by District Judge Gary A. Fenner on 9/1/09. (Mitchell, Lisa)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION ANGELA DAVIS, Plaintiff, vs. CITY OF KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case no. 09-0279-CV-W-GAF
ORDER Presently before the Court is Defendants James Corwin and Robert Vivona's (collectively "Defendants") Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings on Counts II, V, and VI of Plaintiff Angela Davis' ("Plaintiff") Complaint filed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c). (Doc. #15). Defendants contend Plaintiff failed to state a claim under these Counts because she merely alleged negligence on the part of Defendants. Id. at p. 2. "To survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to `state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.'" Ashcroft v. Iqbal, U.S. , 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009) (citing Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 545 (2007), which overruled the "no set of facts" language in Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 (1967)). While it is true that allegations of negligence do not establish a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, see Daniels v. Williams, 474 U.S. 327, 328 (1986), if the alleged "behavior of the governmental officer is so egregious, so outrageous, that it may fairly be said to shock the contemporary conscience," then a claim is stated. County of Sacramento v. Lewis, 523 U.S. 833, 847, n.8 (1998). Here, Plaintiff's allegations of Defendants' conduct with regards to the death of her son may be said to be so outrageous and egregious that a plausible claim for relief has been
stated. For this reason, Defendants' Motion is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Gary A. Fenner Gary A. Fenner, Judge United States District Court DATED: September 1, 2009
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?