Julian et al v. Rigney et al

Filing 46

ORDER granting 16 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; denying 27 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment; granting in part and denying in part 28 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge Jackson L. Kiser on 3/24/14. (ham)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
DANVILLE DIVISION
CHRISTOPHER B. JULIAN, ET AL.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
JAMES RIGNEY, ET AL.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 4:13-cv-00054
ORDER
By: Jackson L. Kiser
Senior United States District Judge

Plaintiffs Christopher B. Julian and Renee G. Julian (“Plaintiffs”) applied for and were
denied a Farm Ownership loan through the Farm Service Agency (“FSA”) of the U.S.
Department of Agriculture (“USDA”). As a result of the denial, Plaintiffs, proceeding pro se and
in forma pauperis, filed suit in this Court against the USDA, seven federal employees, and one
state employee. On October 18, 2013, state employee Wanda Johnson filed a Motion to Dismiss
[ECF No. 16]. Plaintiffs filed a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on January 6, 2014 [ECF
No. 27], and the remaining Federal Defendants collectively filed a Motion to Dismiss on January
14, 2014 [ECF No. 28]. On February 25, 2014, I heard oral arguments from all sides, outlining
their respective positions on the facts, law, and agency record before the Court.

Having

thoroughly reviewed the record and arguments of counsel, the matter is now ripe for decision.
For the reasons stated in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, I find that Plaintiffs
fail to state a claim for a violation of procedural or substantive due process. The Eleventh
Amendment entitles Defendant Johnson to immunity from suit for damages claims in her official
capacity.

Sovereign immunity entitles the USDA and individual Federal Defendants to

immunity from suit for damages claims in their official capacities. Plaintiffs fail to allege that
the individual Federal Defendants violated any clearly established statutory or constitutional

rights, or otherwise acted outside of the scope of their employment. Accordingly, the individual
Federal Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity in their individual capacities. The request
for judicial review of the final agency decision survives dismissal. Plaintiffs fail to establish that
they are entitled to partial summary judgment.
Accordingly, I hereby GRANT Defendant Johnson’s Motion to Dismiss, DENY
Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, and GRANT IN PART and DENY IN PART
Federal Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. Specifically, Federal Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is
DENIED with respect to Plaintiffs’ request for judicial review of the final agency decision, and
GRANTED with respect to all other claims against the USDA, and all claims against the
following employee-defendants, in any capacity: (1) James Rigney; (2) Ronald Kraszewski; (3)
J. Calvin Parrish; (4) Jerry L. King; (5) Roger Klurfeld; (6) Christopher P. Beyerhelm; and (7)
Barbara McLean. The USDA remains as the sole defendant, and the suit will proceed as an
action for judicial review of the final decision of USDA National Appeals Division Director
Roger Klurfeld.
The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Order and accompanying Memorandum
Opinion to Plaintiffs and all counsel of record.
Entered this 24th day of March, 2014.
s/Jackson L. Kiser
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-2-