Scher v. City of Las Vegas, NV et al

Filing 20

ORDER Granting 5 Motion to Dismiss. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendants Motion to Dismiss 5 is granted. Mr. Schers claims against the City of Las Vegas, Carolyn Goodman, Brad Jerbic, Cynthia Leung, and Matthew Walk are dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 5/29/15. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - TR)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3

***

4

Michael C. Sher,

5
6
7

Case No. 2:14-cv-2105-APG-CWH
Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
DISMISS

v.
City of Las Vegas, Nevada, et al,

8

(Dkt. #5)

Defendants.

9
10
Plaintiff Michael Scher, who is proceeding pro se, claims that the City of Las Vegas and
11
several individual defendants violated his civil rights on January 8, 2013, when he was a
12
defendant in municipal court. He seeks damages of $10 billion.
13
Defendants have moved to dismiss the case on the grounds that Mr. Scher has not
14
properly served them. (Dkt. #5.) They note, and the record reflects, that Mr. Scher has not
15
complied with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(2)-(3), which requires service by a non-party or Marshal.
16

Instead, Mr. Scher sent his summons and complaint through certified mail, which is improper.1

17
There are additional defects as well. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(j)(2) allows for service on local
18
governments by either serving the chief executive officer or serving in the manner prescribed by
19
state law. Nevada law allows service upon local governments by delivering a copy of the
20
summons and complaint “to the chairperson of the board of commissioners, president of the
21

council of trustees, mayor of the city, or other head of the legislative department thereof.”2 But

22
the person who signed for receipt of Mr. Scher’s certified mail, Tasha Carpenter, is not an agent
23

authorized to receive service of process for the City of Las Vegas.3 Nor is she an agent

24
25
26

1

(See Dkt. #4 at 5-6.)

27

2

N.R.C.P. 4(d)(5)

3

(See Dkt. #5 at 6.)

28

1

authorized to receive service of process for any of the individual defendants.4 Had a waiver of

2

service been filed, perhaps these defects could be overcome.5 But no waiver was ever filed.

3

Accordingly, I grant defendants’ motion.

4

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss [Dkt. #5] is

5

granted. Mr. Scher’s claims against the City of Las Vegas, Carolyn Goodman, Brad Jerbic,

6

Cynthia Leung, and Matthew Walk are dismissed without prejudice.

7

DATED this 29th day of May, 2015.

8
9

ANDREW P. GORDON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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

28

4

Id.

5

27

See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d).

Page 2 of 2