Kelley et al v. City of Dallas et al

Filing 110

ORDER ACCEPTING 103 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE: The objections are overruled, and the Court ACCEPTS the Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. The Defendant City of Dal las's Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss the Plaintiffs'Federal Claims Against It in the Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint, 70 , and The Defendant Kevin Mansell's Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss the Plaintiffs' Federal Claims Against Him in the Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint, 71 are GRANTED. (Ordered by Judge Jane J. Boyle on 9/26/2017) (ams)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
MARJURITA D. KELLEY et al.,
Plaintiff,
v.
THE CITY OF DALLAS, et al.,
Defendants.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

Civil Action No. 3:16-CV-1015-B-BK

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF
THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The United States Magistrate Judge made findings, conclusions and a recommendation in
this case. Defendant City of Dallas filed objections, and the Court has made a de novo review of
those portions of the proposed findings and recommendation to which objection was made. The
objections are overruled, and the Court ACCEPTS the Findings, Conclusions and
Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge.
Accordingly, The Defendant City of Dallas’s Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss the Plaintiffs’
Federal Claims Against It in the Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint, Doc. 70, and The Defendant
Kevin Mansell’s Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss the Plaintiffs’ Federal Claims Against Him in the
Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint, Doc. 71 are GRANTED.
Normally, courts will afford a plaintiff the opportunity to overcome pleading deficiencies,
unless it appears certain that such repleading would be futile. See Hitt v. City of Pasadena, 561
F.2d 606, 608 (5th Cir. 1977) (“[A] court ordinarily should not dismiss the complaint except
after affording every opportunity for the plaintiff to state a claim upon which relief can be

granted.”). Since this Order is the Court’s first review of Plaintiffs’ allegations, the Court
concludes that they should be given the opportunity to replead their equal protection claim.
If they are able to replead and overcome the grounds for dismissal stated herein, they
should do so by no later than 30 days from the date of this Order. Further, any repleading shall
be accompanied by a synopsis of no more than ten pages, explaining how the amendments
overcome the grounds stated for dismissal in this Order. Should Plaintiffs replead, Defendants
are hereby granted leave to file a response to their synopsis. Any response shall not exceed ten
pages and must be filed within 14 calendar days of the repleading. If Plaintiffs do not demonstrate
in their synopsis that they have overcome the pleading deficiencies outlined by the Court, no
further briefing will be permitted.
SO ORDERED this 26th day of September, 2017.

_________________________________
JANE J. BOYLE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE