Le et al v. Urquart et al
Filing
221
MINUTE ORDER granting in part and denying in part Plaintiffs' 218 Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint: Plaintiffs will be allowed to file a Third Amended Complaint asserting a negligence claim in light of the recent decision i n Beltran-Serrano v. City of Tacoma, 193 Wn.2d 537, 442 P.3d 608 (2019). The Court will set deadlines for the filing of such amended pleading, the filing of any responsive pleading or motion, and the completion of any related discovery after the a ppeal in this matter is resolved and the stay imposed by the Order entered June 4, 2019, docket no. 209, is lifted. Plaintiffs' request to lift the stay and permit them to immediately file their proposed Third Amended Complaint is DENIED. P laintiffs' proposed Third Amended Complaint, docket nos. 218-2 (redlined) & 218-3, attempts to resurrect claims that have already been dismissed. With the exception of the negligence claim, as to which plaintiffs contend a change in the law has transpired, plaintiffs may not, by amending their pleadings, reinstate claims that were previously dismissed. Authorized by Judge Thomas S. Zilly.(MW)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE
5
6
7
8
BAO XUYEN LE, as Personal
Representative of the Estate of Tommy
Le; HOAI “SUNNY” LE; and DIEU
HO,
Plaintiffs,
9
10
11
12
C18-55 TSZ
v.
MINUTE ORDER
REVEREND DR. MARTIN LUTHER
KING, JR. COUNTY; and KING
COUNTY DEPUTY SHERIFF CESAR
MOLINA,
13
Defendants.
14
The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable
15 Thomas S. Zilly, United States District Judge:
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
(1)
Plaintiffs’ motion for leave to amend, docket no. 218, is GRANTED in part
and DENIED in part, as follows.
(a)
Plaintiffs will be allowed to file a Third Amended Complaint
asserting a negligence claim in light of the recent decision in Beltran-Serrano v.
City of Tacoma, 193 Wn.2d 537, 442 P.3d 608 (2019). The Court will set
deadlines for the filing of such amended pleading, the filing of any responsive
pleading or motion, and the completion of any related discovery after the appeal in
this matter is resolved and the stay imposed by the Order entered June 4, 2019,
docket no. 209, is lifted.
(b)
Plaintiffs’ request to lift the stay and permit them to immediately file
their proposed Third Amended Complaint is DENIED. Plaintiffs’ proposed Third
Amended Complaint, docket nos. 218-2 (redlined) & 218-3, attempts to resurrect
23
MINUTE ORDER - 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
claims that have already been dismissed. See Minute Order (docket no. 38)
(dismissing claim for reckless or negligent infliction of emotional distress, which
plaintiffs have tried to replead as the Fifth Cause of Action in the proposed Third
Amended Complaint); Stip. & Order (docket no. 65) (dismissing claim for
negligent selection, training, and supervision, which is set forth as the Sixth Cause
of Action in the proposed Third Amended Complaint); Stip. & Order (docket
no. 90) (approving non-suit of Julia Nguyen, who is named as a plaintiff in the
proposed Third Amended Complaint); Minute Order (docket no. 143) (dismissing
the equal protection / racially-selective law enforcement claim that appears within
the First Cause of Action in the proposed Third Amended Complaint); Order
(docket no. 189) (dismissing claim for outrage, identified as the Fourth Cause of
Action in the proposed Third Amended Complaint, and terminating as plaintiffs
Uyen Le, Kim Tuyet Le, Quoc Nguyen, Tam Nguyen, Dung Nguyen, and
Jefferson Ngyuen aka Jefferson Ho, who are listed in the caption of the proposed
Third Amended Complaint). With the exception of the negligence claim, as to
which plaintiffs contend a change in the law has transpired, plaintiffs may not, by
amending their pleadings, reinstate claims that were previously dismissed.
(2)
record.
The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Minute Order to all counsel of
Dated this 2nd day of December, 2019.
12
William M. McCool
Clerk
13
14
s/Karen Dews
Deputy Clerk
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
MINUTE ORDER - 2
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?