Case: Mahoney v. Holder

2:14-cv-00794 | U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington

Filed Date: May 28, 2014

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On May 28, 2014, approximately 125 police officers from the Seattle Police Department (SPD) brought this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. The case was assigned to Judge Marsha J. Pechman. The plaintiffs each individually sued the U.S. Department of Justice and the City of Seattle, including the SPD and the Seattle Police Monitor Team, under 42 U.S.C. §1983 for their roles in implementing Seattle’s new use of force policy (UF policy). The new UF policy limited police officers’ ability to use force against civilians without repercussions, and the plaintiffs argued that this policy violated their constitutional rights under the Second, Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments. Specifically, they alleged that the policy violated their constitutional right to self-defense, as well as Due Process and Equal Protection. Initially representing themselves pro se, the plaintiffs sought declaratory relief, injunctive relief, damages, and attorneys’ fees and costs.

On August 21, 2014, the City of Seattle moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim. It alleged that the plaintiffs had misunderstood both what their constitutional rights were and what the new UF policy did, as the officers’ claims were not supported by the U.S. Constitution or by case law. On the same day, the Seattle Police Monitor Team filed a motion to dismiss the case because the members of the monitor team had quasi-judicial immunity. The monitors were appointed by the court as part of a consent decree from an earlier settlement in United States v. City of Seattle regarding the SPD’s excessive use of force. So, the monitors argued, they could not be considered part of the city the way that the SPD could.

Six days after the motions were filed, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint that added new factual allegations about the policy and removed those plaintiffs that no longer wished to litigate. The amended complaint emphasized the idea of constitutional self-defense as a right embedded in several amendments rather than stated outright. In September 2014, the defendants filed two motions to dismiss offering arguments similar to those found in the motions to dismiss the original complaint. On October 9, the court held oral arguments on the issue. The plaintiffs also obtained private counsel during this month.

On October 17, 2014, the court granted both motions to dismiss. Because the complaint had already been amended once and amending it further would be “futile,” Judge Pechman dismissed the case with prejudice. 62 F.Supp.3d 1215. The court held that the monitor team had quasi-judicial immunity and, even without it, the plaintiffs’ claims betrayed their misunderstanding regarding what their constitutional rights were, and the constitutional right to self-defense did not exist; the plaintiffs had failed to allege that any of the defendants had violated their rights.

On November 14, 2014, the plaintiffs appealed the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the lower court’s decision nearly three years later, on September 19, 2017, finding that neither the case law nor the constitution entitled the plaintiffs to self-defense. 871 F.3d 873.

On December 28, 2017, the plaintiffs petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to hear this case. On April 2, 2018, their petition was denied. The plaintiffs exhausted their options for appealing this case, and it is now closed.


2:14-cv-00794	Docket	Oct. 11, 2017	Oct. 11, 2017 Docket
1 2:14-cv-00794	Civil Rights Complaint	May 28, 2014	May 28, 2014 Complaint
13 2:14-cv-00794	First Amended Complaint Under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 And 28 U.S.C. § 1331	Aug. 27, 2014	Aug. 27, 2014 Complaint
73 2:14-cv-00794	Order on Motion to Dismiss	Oct. 17, 2014	Oct. 17, 2014 Order/Opinion 62 F.Supp.3d 1215
79 2:14-cv-00794 14-35970	Opinion U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit	Sept. 19, 2017	Sept. 19, 2017 Order/Opinion 871 F.3d 873

ECF Number	Date	Description	Link
1	May 28, 2014	CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT against defendants (3 Summons(es) issued) (Receipt # SEA 64041), filed by plaintiffs Robert Mahoney, et al. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(PM) (Entered: 05/28/2014) 1 Civil Cover Sheet View on RECAP	RECAP
2	June 17, 2014	NOTICE of Appearance by attorney Gregory Colin Narver on behalf of Defendant City of Seattle. (Narver, Gregory) (Entered: 06/17/2014)	RECAP
3	June 18, 2014	NOTICE of Related Case(s) 12-01282, by Defendant City of Seattle. (Narver, Gregory) (Entered: 06/18/2014)	RECAP
4	June 20, 2014	MOTION to remove and to add names from the list of plaintiffs by Plaintiff Sjon Stevens. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(MD) (Entered: 06/20/2014) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER	RECAP
5	June 23, 2014	NOTICE: Plaintiff Sjon C Stevens has registered to electronically file and receive electronic service in this case. (VB) Modified on 6/24/2014 -mailed copy of this notice to all pltfs(MD). (Entered: 06/23/2014)	RECAP
6	June 23, 2014	MINUTE ORDER striking 4 Plaintiffs' Motion to remove and add names from the list of plaintiffs, by Judge Marsha J. Pechman.(MD, cc to all pltfs) (Entered: 06/23/2014)	RECAP
7	June 26, 2014	RESPONSE, by Plaintiff Sjon C Stevens, to 4 MOTION to remove and to add names from the list of plaintiffs. (Stevens, Sjon) Re: 3 NOTICE of Related Case(s) 12-01282, by Defendant City of Seattle. (Narver, Gregory) Presiding Judge: Pechman, Marsha J. Modified on 6/26/2014- Plaintiff Stevens called and will re-file/link to proper document (MD). Modified on 6/26/2014 (VB). (Entered: 06/26/2014)	RECAP
	June 26, 2014	Notice of Docket Text Modification
	June 26, 2014	NOTICE of Docket Text Modification re 7 Response to Motion, : Per Filer, Response filed relates to 3 NOTICE of Related Case(s) 12-01282, by Defendant City of Seattle. (Narver, Gregory) (VB)
8	Aug. 21, 2014	DISREGARD THIS FILING. FILED IN ERROR. CORRECTLY FILED AS 9 MOTION to Dismiss by Defendant City of Seattle. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) Noting Date 9/19/2014, (Narver, Gregory) (PS). (Entered: 08/21/2014) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER	RECAP
9	Aug. 21, 2014	MOTION to Dismiss by Defendant City of Seattle. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order, # 2 Certificate of Service) Noting Date 9/19/2014, (Narver, Gregory) (Entered: 08/21/2014) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER 2 Certificate of Service View on PACER	RECAP
10	Aug. 21, 2014	NOTICE of Appearance by attorney Bradley S Keller on behalf of Defendants Matthew Barge, Merrick Bobb, Peter Ehrlichman, Ronald Ward. (Keller, Bradley) (Entered: 08/21/2014)	RECAP
11	Aug. 21, 2014	MOTION to Dismiss by Defendants Matthew Barge, Merrick Bobb, Peter Ehrlichman, Ronald Ward. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) Noting Date 9/12/2014, (Keller, Bradley) (Entered: 08/21/2014) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER	RECAP
12	Aug. 21, 2014	DECLARATION of Ryan-Lang ISO Mot. to Dismiss filed by Defendants Matthew Barge, Merrick Bobb, Peter Ehrlichman, Ronald Ward re 11 MOTION to Dismiss (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2-8)(Keller, Bradley) (Entered: 08/21/2014) 1 Exhibit 1 View on PACER 2 Exhibit 2-8 View on PACER	RECAP
	Aug. 21, 2014	Notice of Docket Text Modification
	Aug. 21, 2014	Set/Reset Motion Noting Date
	Aug. 21, 2014	NOTICE of Docket Text Modification re 8 MOTION to Dismiss : Docket Entry stricken due to corrupted PDF document attachment. Refiled as Document #9 (PS)
	Aug. 21, 2014	Noting Date Set/Reset re 9 MOTION to Dismiss : Noting Date 9/12/2014, (AW)
13	Aug. 27, 2014	AMENDED COMPLAINT against defendant(s) All Defendants, filed by Sjon C Stevens.(Stevens, Sjon) (Entered: 08/27/2014)	RECAP
14	Sept. 3, 2014	NOTICE of Appearance by attorney Athan E Tramountanas on behalf of Plaintiffs Robert Mahoney, Sjon C Stevens. (Tramountanas, Athan) (Entered: 09/03/2014)	RECAP
15	Sept. 4, 2014	NOTICE to Withdraw Pending Motion re 11 MOTION to Dismiss ; by Defendant Merrick Bobb. (Keller, Bradley) (Entered: 09/04/2014)	RECAP
16	Sept. 4, 2014	NOTICE of Appearance by attorney Bradley S Keller on behalf of Defendant Merrick Bobb. (Keller, Bradley) (Entered: 09/04/2014)	RECAP
17	Sept. 4, 2014	MOTION Concerning FRCP 5 Service Requirements by Defendant Merrick Bobb. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) Noting Date 9/19/2014, (Keller, Bradley) (Entered: 09/04/2014) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER	RECAP
18	Sept. 4, 2014	DECLARATION of Nicholas Ryan-Lang ISO Mot. Concerning Service Requirements filed by Defendant Merrick Bobb re 17 MOTION Concerning FRCP 5 Service Requirements (Keller, Bradley) (Entered: 09/04/2014)	RECAP
19	Sept. 4, 2014	MOTION to Dismiss the Amended Complaint by Defendant Merrick Bobb. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) Noting Date 9/26/2014, (Keller, Bradley) (Entered: 09/04/2014) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER	RECAP
20	Sept. 4, 2014	CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Defendant Merrick Bobb re 18 Declaration, 19 MOTION to Dismiss the Amended Complaint, 16 Notice of Appearance, 15 Notice to Withdraw Pending Motion, 17 MOTION Concerning FRCP 5 Service Requirements (Keller, Bradley) (Entered: 09/04/2014)	RECAP
21	Sept. 8, 2014	NOTICE: Plaintiff Christopher Myers has registered to electronically file and receive electronic service in this case. (VB) (Entered: 09/08/2014)	RECAP
22	Sept. 8, 2014	NOTICE to Withdraw Pending Motion re 9 MOTION to Dismiss ; by Defendant City of Seattle. (Narver, Gregory) (Entered: 09/08/2014)	RECAP
23	Sept. 10, 2014	NOTICE of Appearance by attorney Gregory Colin Narver on behalf of Defendant City of Seattle. (Narver, Gregory) (Entered: 09/10/2014)	RECAP
24	Sept. 10, 2014	Stipulated MOTION Concerning Service of Plaintiffs by Defendant Merrick Bobb. Noting Date 9/10/2014, (Ryan-Lang, Nicholas) (Entered: 09/10/2014)	RECAP
25	Sept. 11, 2014	MOTION to Dismiss CITY DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT by Defendants City of Seattle, Peter Holmes, Ed Murray. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) Noting Date 10/3/2014, (Narver, Gregory) (Entered: 09/11/2014) 1 Proposed Order View on PACER	RECAP
26	Sept. 11, 2014	ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE of summons and complaint by counsel ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE OF THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT on behalf of Defendants City of Seattle, Peter Holmes, Ed Murray on 09/11/2014. (Narver, Gregory) (Entered: 09/11/2014)	RECAP
27	Sept. 12, 2014	ORDER - On FRCP 5 Service and Partially Stipulated Motion. All pro se Plaintiffs must sign up for service via CM/ECF within 14 days of this Order. Failure to register may result in the dismissal of your case. RE: 24 Stipulated MOTION Concerning Service of Plaintiffs filed by Merrick Bobb, 17 MOTION Concerning FRCP 5 Service Requirements filed by Merrick Bobb, by Judge Marsha J. Pechman. (MD, Copy of Order mailed to ALL PLAINTIFFS) (Entered: 09/12/2014)	RECAP
28	Sept. 12, 2014	Summons Issued as to defendant(s) Robert Mahoney. (TM) (Entered: 09/15/2014)	RECAP
29	Sept. 15, 2014	NOTICE: Plaintiff Joshua Goodwin has registered to receive electronic service. The party WILL NOT be e-filing. (VB) (Entered: 09/15/2014)	RECAP
30	Sept. 19, 2014	NOTICE: Plaintiff Nathan Lemberg has registered to receive electronic service. The party WILL NOT be e-filing. (VB) (Entered: 09/19/2014)	RECAP
31	Sept. 19, 2014	NOTICE: Plaintiff Alan Richards has registered to electronically file and receive electronic service in this case. (VB) (Entered: 09/19/2014)	RECAP
32	Sept. 19, 2014	NOTICE: Plaintiff Shannon Waldorf has registered to electronically file and receive electronic service in this case. (VB) (Entered: 09/19/2014)	RECAP
33	Sept. 19, 2014	NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal as to party(s) Leon J Towne, filed by Plaintiff Leon J Towne pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.Proc.41(a)(1). (LMK) (Entered: 09/22/2014)	RECAP
34	Sept. 22, 2014	NOTICE: Plaintiff Tabitha Sexton has registered to electronically file and receive electronic service in this case. (VB) (Entered: 09/22/2014)	RECAP

Case: Mahoney v. Holder

2:14-cv-00794 | U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington

Case Summary

Related Cases

People

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Docket

Docket for: Mahoney v. Holder

Case Details