Foley v. Hermes et al

Filing 26

ORDER Granting Defendants' 22 Motion to Strike. The Clerk of the Court shall Strike Plaintiff's 21 Request for Judicial Notice from the court's docket. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 10/23/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6

***

7

MICHAEL FOLEY,

8
9
10
11

v.

Case No. 2:16-cv-02369-APG-PAL
Plaintiff,

ORDER

CHRISTOPHER HERMES, et al.,

(Mot Strike – ECF No. 22)
Defendants.

12

Before the court is Defendants’ Motion to Strike (ECF No. 22) Plaintiff’s Request for

13

Judicial Notice, or in the Alternative, Response to Plaintiff’s Request for Judicial Notice. The

14

court has considered the motion, and plaintiff’s Response (ECF No. 24).

15

Plaintiff Michael Foley’s Request for Judicial Notice (ECF No. 21) asks the court to take

16

judicial notice of a state court decision and order in a case filed against CCSD and others involving

17

claims brought under Title IX, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and NRS 388.135 alleging two students were

18

bullied and harassed at school. The state court found that CCSD violated Title IX and plaintiffs’

19

substantive due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment and the plaintiffs were entitled to

20

judgment on these two claims. Plaintiff asks the court to take judicial notice of a news article

21

reporting that CCSD was set to revamp its anti-bullying policy.

22

Defendants seek to strike his request as an unauthorized and fugitive document. Plaintiff

23

opposes the motion arguing the recent state court decision and article support his claims against

24

the CCSD defendants in this case, and will “better inform the court of the pattern of practices and

25

policies that lead to the problems identified by this Plaintiff.”

26

Having reviewed and considered the matter, the court will grant the motion to strike. The

27

request for judicial notice is not related to any pending motion filed by either side. Rather, it

28

appears plaintiff is attempting to inform the court of his view that, because CCSD has been found
1

1

liable for violations in an unrelated case, the court should consider the state court’s findings as

2

evidence the CCSD defendants have engaged in the conduct complained of in this case.

3

IT IS ORDERED:

4

1. Defendants’ Motion to Strike (ECF No. 22) is GRANTED.

5

2. The Clerk of the Court shall STRIKE Plaintiff’s Request for Judicial Notice (ECF

6

No. 21) from the court’s docket.

7

DATED this 23rd day of October, 2017.

8
9
PEGGY A. LEEN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2