Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Cooke v. United States

United States District Court, N.D. New York

November 7, 2017

JESSICA COOKE, Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant.

          STEPHEN L. LOCKWOOD, P.C. STEPHEN L. LOCKWOOD, ESQ., Counsel for Plaintiff.

          HON. GRANT C. JAQUITH Acting United States Attorney for the N.D.N.Y. Counsel for Defendant KAREN F. LESPERANCE, ESQ. Assistant U.S. Attorney.

          DECISION AND ORDER

          GLENN T. SUDDABY, Chief United States District Judge.

         Currently before the Court, in this civil rights action filed by Jessica Cooke (“Plaintiff”) against the United States of America (“Defendant”), is Defendant's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1). (Dkt. No. 8.) For the reasons set forth below, Defendant's motion is granted.

         I. RELEVANT BACKGROUND

         A. Plaintiff's Claims

         Generally, liberally construed, Plaintiff's Amended Complaint alleges that, during a traffic stop on or about May 7, 2015, in St. Lawrence County, New York, two U.S. Custom and Border protection (“CBP”) officers, without cause, “shoved her into the side of her car, ” “threw her violently to the ground, ” and “violently and repeatedly tased the [her] with [a] taser gun, causing [her] to suffer physical and emotional pain and injury.” (Dkt. No. 4 [Plf.'s Am. Compl.] at ¶ 22.) Based on these factual allegations, Plaintiff claims that Defendant violated her following rights: (1) her rights under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1983, 1985, and the Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments by using excessive force; (2) her rights under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1983, 1985, and the Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments by failing to intervene in the use of excessive force; and (3) assault and battery under 28 U.S.C. §§ 2679 (“FTCA”). (See generally Dkt. No. 4 [Plf.'s Am. Compl.].) Familiarity with the factual allegations supporting these claims in Plaintiff's Amended Complaint is assumed in this Decision and Order, which is intended primarily for the review of the parties. (Id.)

         B. Relevant Procedural Background

         On April 1, 2016, Plaintiff's counsel filed a “Civil Rights Complaint” with the United States Department of Homeland Security's Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (“DHS/CRCL”), alleging violation of her civil rights due to the wrongful conduct of CBP agents. (Dkt. No. 9 at ¶ 5 [Plf.'s Aff. in Response to Def.'s Motion to Dismiss].) On May 31, 2016, Plaintiff sent by U.S. mail a “Claim for Damage, Injury or Death Standard Form 95” (“SF-95”) to DHS/CRCL. (Id. at ¶ 6.) Plaintiff did not submit an administrative claim to the CBP. (Id.)

         On June 22, 2016, DHS/CRCL acknowledged receipt of Plaintiff's April 1, 2016, civil rights complaint “regarding the treatment of Jessica Cooke by employees of U.S. Customs and Border Patrol (CBP).” (Id. at ¶ 7.) DHS/CRCL requested a signed authorization from Plaintiff allowing counsel to act on her behalf. (Id.) Plaintiff's counsel forwarded Plaintiff's executed authorization on July 5, 2016. (Id.)

         Having received no reply from DHS/CRCL with respect to the SF-95, Plaintiff commenced this action by filing her original Complaint on February 17, 2017. (Dkt. No. 1 [Plf.'s Coml.].)

         Plaintiff's Complaint asserted claims against DHS, CBP, CBP Agent Chad Kenna, CBP Agent Nicole Martin, and one or more unidentified CBP agents. (Id.) Summonses were issued for these entities and individuals (except for the John and Jane Doe Defendants) on February 27, 2017. (Dkt. No. 2 [Summonses].)

         On March 1, 2017, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint that named the United States as a Defendant and appeared to abandon her claims against the aforementioned entities and individuals (at least in their individual capacities). (Dkt. No. 4, at Caption and ¶¶ 4-10 [Plf.'s Am. Compl.].) On March 6, 2017, the Clerk's Office confirmed with Plaintiff's counsel that Plaintiff does not want to include the aforementioned entities and individuals as ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.