Brown v. Herbert et al

Filing 30

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS Grants 19 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by Rob Anderson, Utah Republican Party, Grants 22 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Gary Herbert, Spencer Cox, Approves and Adopts 28 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 19 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by Rob Anderson, Utah Republican Party, Denies 13 MOTION for Injunction filed by Robert Louis Brown, 22 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Gary Herbert, Spencer Co, 13 MOTION for Injunction filed by Robert Louis Brown. See Order for details. Signed by Judge Clark Waddoups on 2/12/19. (jmr)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION

ROBERT LOUIS BROWN,
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 2:17-cv-948
GARY HERBERT, State of Utah Governor,
SPENCER COX, State of Utah Lieutenant
Governor; UTAH REPUBLICAN PARTY;
and ROB ANDERSON, Utah Republican
Party Chairperson,

Judge Clark Waddoups
Magistrate Judge Dustin B. Pead

Defendants.

This case was assigned to United States District Judge Clark Waddoups, who then
referred it to United States Magistrate Dustin B. Pead pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (ECF
No. 16). On December 11, 2018, Judge Pead issued a Report and Recommendation pertaining to
the following three motions: (1) Motion for Injunctive Relief filed by Robert Louis Brown (ECF
No. 13); (2) Motion to Dismiss filed by the Utah Republican Party and Rob Anderson (ECF No.
19), and (3) Motion to Dismiss filed by Gary Herbert and Spencer Cox in both their official and
individual capacities (ECF No. 22). Judge Pead recommends Mr. Brown’s Motion for Injunctive
Relief be denied and that the two motions to dismiss be granted. Report & Recommend., at 5
(ECF No. 28). Mr. Brown did not file an Objection.
Upon review of the record and Judge Pead’s findings, the court concludes that Mr. Brown
has failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Mr. Brown asserts abuse of office,
fraud, dishonesty, racial discrimination, and so forth. He calls for the resignation of various

1

individuals and for the court to invalidate the 2016 Governor’s election. Mr. Brown relies upon
Utah Code Ann. § 76-8-201 as the foundation for a portion of his claims, but the statute is a
criminal statute and inapplicable in civil litigation. Moreover, Mr. Brown’s allegations consist
only of bald assertions, such that even a liberal reading of the complaint yields no viable claim
against any defendant. 1 Having failed to state a viable claim, Mr. Brown’s Motion for Injunctive
Relief necessarily fails as well.
Accordingly, the court APPROVES AND ADOPTS Judge Pead’s Report and
Recommendation (ECF. No. 28) and hereby DENIES Mr. Brown’s Motion for Injunctive Relief
(ECF No. 13). The court further GRANTS Defendants’ respective Motions to Dismiss (ECF No.
19, 22). This case is dismissed with prejudice.
SO ORDERED this 12th day of February, 2019.
BY THE COURT:

____________________________________
Clark Waddoups
United States District Judge

It is unclear whether Mr. Brown intended to assert claims against Governor Herbert and
Lieutenant Governor Cox in their official capacity or individual capacity or both. Regardless of
which capacity they were sued under, Mr. Brown has failed to state a claim against them.
Likewise, it is unclear whether Mr. Brown intended to assert a claim against the State of Utah.
No return of service has been provided as to the State, and even if service had been processed
properly, Mr. Brown has not shown the State has waived its immunity from suit or that he has
any viable claim against the State.
1

2