Free Order on Motion to Dismiss - District Court of California - California


File Size: 16.9 kB
Pages: 2
Date: June 30, 2008
File Format: PDF
State: California
Category: District Court of California
Author: unknown
Word Count: 358 Words, 2,165 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/casd/258482/41.pdf

Download Order on Motion to Dismiss - District Court of California ( 16.9 kB)


Preview Order on Motion to Dismiss - District Court of California
Case 3:07-cv-02187-IEG-NLS

Document 41

Filed 06/30/2008

Page 1 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 vs. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Presently before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss Third-Party Complaint Against John R. Monroe. On November 15, 2007, the United States filed a complaint against Roosevelt Kyle seeking to enjoin him from preparing tax returns for others. On December 21, 2007, Kyle filed an Answer and Third Party Complaint against Department of Justice Trial Attorney Jon R. Monroe and Does 1 through 1000. Roosevelt asserts Mr. Monoroe is liable for failing to "settle the account and close this instant case in a timely manner" and asks for "forfeiture of the public hazard bond of John R. Monroe, IA #0008881." (Counterclaims, at 7-8; Doc. 5.) To the extent the court interprets Kyle's allegations as implicating Mr. Monroe in wrongful -1ROOSEVELT KYLE, individually or d/b/a CENTURY ONE RESORTS, LTD or CENTURY ONE ASSOCIATES; REBECCA TYREE a/k/a/ RUBEE TYREE or RUBY TYREE; COA FINANCIAL GROUP, LLC d/b/a COA FINANCIAL NETWORK TRUST c/o T&N FASHION; and EAGLE FINANCIAL SERVICES, LLC Defendants. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff, CASE NO. 07CV2187 IEG (NLS) ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO DISMISS THIRDPARTY COMPLAINT AGAINST JOHN R. MONROE [Doc. No. 21]

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 3:07-cv-02187-IEG-NLS

Document 41

Filed 06/30/2008

Page 2 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

activity, the Court finds Kyle fails to state a viable claim. The conduct about which he complains was allegedly performed by Mr. Monroe within the scope of his official duties as an employee of the United States. Suits against employees in their official capacities are actually suits against the United States. Gilbert v. DaGrossa, 756 F.2d 1455, 1458-59 (9th Cir. 1985). Where the suit has not been consented to by the United States, dismissal of the action is required. See id. Kyle's third party complaint is ordered DISMISSED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: June 30, 2008 IRMA E. GONZALEZ, Chief Judge United States District Court

-2-