Dawson et al v. South Correctional Entity et al

Filing 192

ORDER granting King County Defendants' 136 Motion for Summary Judgment. All claims brought by Plaintiffs against King County and King County Sheriff's Office deputies Raul Adams, Leland Adams, and Alan Tag are DISMISSED. Signed by Judge Ricardo S. Martinez. (PM)

Case 2:19-cv-01987-RSM Document 192 Filed 09/08/21 Page 1 of 2

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

7
8
9

RUSSEL H. DAWSON, Personal
Representative of the Estate of Damaris
Rodriguez, et al.,

10
11
12
13
14

Plaintiffs,

CASE NO. C19-1987RSM
ORDER GRANTING KING
COUNTY DEFENDANTS’ MOTION
FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

v.
SOUTH CORRECTIONAL ENTITY
(“SCORE”), a Governmental Administrative
Agency, et al.,
Defendants.

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

This matter comes before the Court on King County Defendants’ Motion for Summary
Judgment. Dkt. #136. Defendants move to dismiss all of Plaintiffs’ claims against King
County and King County Sheriff’s Office deputies Raul Adams, Leland Adams, and Alan Tag.
In Response, Plaintiffs state that the Motion is “mostly unopposed.” Dkt. #160 at 1.
Plaintiffs state that “[d]iscovery and factual investigation relating to King County and the
process by which Damaris was booked at SCORE have, for the most part, exonerated King
County, and Plaintiffs agree there is no admissible evidence that Damaris’s death was
proximately caused by King County’s errors and omissions.” Id. Plaintiffs submit a chart
indicating that dismissal of each claim against these Defendants is either unopposed due to a
ORDER GRANTING KING COUNTY DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT - 1

Case 2:19-cv-01987-RSM Document 192 Filed 09/08/21 Page 2 of 2

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

lack of admissible evidence or now moot. Id. at 1–2. For example, Plaintiffs state “[b]ecause
there is no admissible evidence of false arrest/imprisonment, the issue of whether or not King
County is immune for such claims under RCW 10.99.070 (as the County argues in (F)) is
moot.” Plaintiffs note their strong disagreement with how King County frames the legal issues
in this case. See Id. at 159 n.2.
The Court finds that Plaintiffs are essentially conceding the merits of King County’s
Motion due to a lack of proximate cause and agrees as to the mootness of remaining claims.
The Court will therefore grant this Motion and finds no reason to further discuss the
disagreement between the parties as to the framing of the legal issues related to these claims.
Accordingly, after having reviewed the relevant briefing and the remainder of the
record, the Court finds and ORDERS that King County Defendants’ Motion for Summary
Judgment, Dkt. #136, is GRANTED. All claims brought by Plaintiffs against King County and
King County Sheriff’s Office deputies Raul Adams, Leland Adams, and Alan Tag are
DISMISSED.
DATED this 8th day of September, 2021.

16
17
18
19
20

A

RICARDO S. MARTINEZ
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

21
22
23
24
ORDER GRANTING KING COUNTY DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT - 2