Vallejos v. Lovelace Medical Center et al
ORDER by Circuit Judge Paul Kelly, Jr. granting 12 Second Judicial District Court's Motion to Dismiss and dismissing the Second Judicial District without prejudice; denying 15 Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss the Second Judicial District's Motion to Dismiss and to Reject and Dismiss SJDC's notice of completion of briefing. (rt)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
LOVELACE MEDICAL CENTER and
the 2nd JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT,
ORDER GRANTING SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT’S
MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT
THIS MATTER comes on for consideration of the Second Judicial District Court’s
Motion to Dismiss Complaint filed March 15, 2017. Doc. 12. The parties are familiar
with the facts and it is unnecessary to restate them here. Plainly, the Second Judicial
District is an arm of the State that is protected against a suit in federal court by Eleventh
Amendment immunity. See N.M. Stat. Ann. § 34-6-21; Alden v. Maine, 527 U.S. 706,
713 (1999); Vacek v. Court of Appeals, 325 F. App’x. 647, 649 (10th Cir. 2009)
(unpublished). Mr. Vallejos claims that he is not seeking monetary relief against the State
but wants an investigation of State judicial corruption. Doc. 1 at 7. Although he
identifies no basis in law for such a remedy by a federal court, the Second Judicial
District is not a “person” amenable to suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Will v. Mich.
Dep’t of State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 71 (1989).
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the Second Judicial District Court’s
Motion to Dismiss Complaint filed March 15, 2017 (Doc. 12) is granted and the Second
Judicial District is dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss the Second
Judicial District Court’s Motion . . . and to Reject and Dismiss Notice of Completion of
Briefing on SJDC Motion to Dismiss filed April 3, 2017 (Doc. 15), is denied.1
DATED this 14th day of April, 2017 at Santa Fe, New Mexico.
United States Circuit Judge
Sitting by Designation
Though untimely, the court has considered Plaintiff’s response to the motion to dismiss.
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?