King v. Clallam Bay Corrections Center et al

Filing 16

ORDER denying 11 Motion for substitute service; and RENOTING the 14 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis TO: 7/15/2011. Signed by Magistrate Judge J Richard Creatura.(CMG; cc to Plaintiff)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

10
11

ROBERT J. KING,
CASE NO. C11-5269RBL/JRC

12

Plaintiff,

13
14
15

v.
CLALLAM BAY CORRECTIONS
CENTER, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17
18
19

ORDER ASKING THE PARTIES FOR
CLARIFICATION AND DENYING
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
ALTERNATE SERVICE

This is a state tort action with a civil rights claim in it and not, as the Attorney General’s
Office asserts, solely a federal cause of action (ECF No. 1, page 2 ¶ 5). Therefore, further
clarification is required.

20
The Attorney General’s Office removed the action from state court because of the federal
21
22

claim (ECF No. 1). Plaintiff states that all defendants, except Physician Assistant Gregory C.

23

Miller, have been personally served (ECF No. 11). Plaintiff has a motion pending asking the

24

court to serve defendant Miller (ECF No. 11). Mr. Miller no longer works for the Washington

25

State Department of Corrections and plaintiff does not have a current address for Mr. Miller.

26

Plaintiff asks that the Attorney General’s Office accept service on behalf of Mr. Miller (ECF No.

ORDER - 1

1

11). Plaintiff argues that the defendant is being sued in his official capacity pursuant to RCW

2

4.92.020.

3
4

The Attorney General’s Office has withdrawn from the representation of Mr. Miller and
Mr. Miller is now represented by William H. Walsh and Margaret J. Pak (ECF No. 8 and 9).

5
6
7
8
9
10
11

Plaintiff has filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis, which if granted would obligate the
court to attempt service on Mr. Miller on plaintiff’s behalf.
Before considering the motion to proceed in forma pauperis, the court needs to inquire
from the parties if service of process on Mr. Miller is still an issue in this action. If Mr. Miller is
not contesting service of process, then there is no need for the court to grant in forma pauperis
status in this action, since the filing fee has been paid and service has apparently been completed

12
on the other defendants. Therefore, Mr. Miller’s counsel will inform the court if their client is
13
14
15

contesting service of process on or before July 15, 2011.
The motion for substitute service, (ECF No. 11), is DENIED. The Washington State

16

Attorney General’s Office may accept service on behalf of the state itself, or the state in a state

17

tort action, but that does not make it proper for the Attorney General’s Office to accept service

18

on behalf of a person who is now represented by another attorney.

19

The motion to proceed in forma pauperis, (ECF No. 14), is re-noted on the court’s own

20
motion for July 15, 2011.
21
22

DATED this 21st day of June, 2011.

A

23
24

J. Richard Creatura
United States Magistrate Judge

25
26

ORDER - 2