Espinosa Rodriguez v. Naylor et al
| Irving Joel Espinosa Rodriguez |
| Officer Vachon, Lt. Michael S. Naylor and City of Newport |
| 1:2024cv00363 |
| September 13, 2024 |
| US District Court for the District of Rhode Island |
| Lincoln D Almond |
| Mary S McElroy |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 19, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
TEXT ORDER : Mr. Rodriguez, having received a parking ticket from the City of Newport for allegedly parking his motorcycle in a "No parking Emergency" zone, has brought an action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983 alleging violation of his "right to travel freely." Mr. Rodriguez claims federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1331. (ECF No. 1). The Court, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3), must dismiss an action whenever it determines that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction. There are fundamental defects in Mr. Rodriguez Complaint. The Complaint does not allege the existence of a government custom, policy, or practice. Monell v. Dep't. of Soc. Serv. of City of N.Y., 436 U.S. 658, 690 (1978). In Claim II, Mr. Rodriguez asserts a violation of 1983. But 1983 does not confer rights; it merely enables jurisdiction in the federal court when some other constitutional or statutory provision creates a right. In Claim III, Mr. Rodriguez alleges a breach of public trust. He does not, however, cite any constitutional or statutory provision that gives him a private cause of action for such a breach. The remaining claim, in which he alleges that his "right to travel freely" was violated consists of conclusory statements. The Rules "do not require courts to credit a complaints conclusory statements without reference to its factual context." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 686 (2009). Here, there is no factual context except for the issuance of a parking ticket, and it is not apparent to the Court how issuance of a parking ticket or establishment of a "No parking emergency" zone impinges the right to travel or otherwise states a plausible claim for relief. Although the Court doubts that there are factual circumstances which can convert a parking ticket into a constitutional violation of the right to travel, because of the plaintiff's pro se status, the Court extends him thirty (30) days in which to amend his Complaint to provide a sufficient factual basis to support his claim of federal question jurisdiction. If he does not file an Amended Complaint, or if any Amended Complaint that is filed fails to demonstrate federal question jurisdiction, the case will be DISMISSED.. So Ordered by District Judge Mary S. McElroy on 9/19/2024. (Potter, Carrie)
|
| Filing 2 DOCKET NOTE: Received a duplicate copy of the complaint. (Attachments: #1 Envelope) (Hill, Cherelle) |
| Filing fee: $ 405.00, receipt number 100001760 (Hill, Cherelle) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT, filed by Irving Joel Espinosa Rodriguez. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Violation, #3 Filing Fee, #4 Email)(Hill, Cherelle) |
| Case assigned to District Judge Mary S. McElroy and Magistrate Judge Lincoln D. Almond. (Hill, Cherelle) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Rhode Island District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
