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.

Annan-Yartey v. Securitas Security Service USA, Inc

United States District Court, D. Hawaii

September 13, 2018

NAPOLEON T. ANNAN-YARTEY, SR., Plaintiff,
v.
SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICE USA, INC.; SANJ SAPPAL; JUSTIN CASTRO; E. RODRIGUEZ; W. AGAPAY; R. RODERICK, Defendants.

          ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT, FILED JULY 16, 2018 (ECF No. 31)

          HELEN GILLMOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         On July 16, 2018, Plaintiff filed his Third Amended Complaint, naming as Defendants Securitas Security Service USA Inc. (hereafter “Securitas”), Sanj Sappal, Justin Castro, E. Rodriguez, W. Agapay, and Rojas Roderick. (ECF No. 29). The named individual defendants are all employees of Securitas. On July 31, 2018, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the Third Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 31).

         Plaintiff filed seven different documents that he labeled as Complaints throughout the course of proceedings in this case. Both the Magistrate Judge and the District Judge issued multiple orders with detailed instructions and guidance to inform Plaintiff how to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules for the District of Hawaii. Despite the Court's multiple efforts, Plaintiff continually failed to comply with the Rules.[1] Plaintiff has not properly pled a federal law cause of action to confer the Court with subject-matter jurisdiction.

         Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint does not contain a plausible federal law cause of action. There is no diversity jurisdiction in this case. The Court declines to take supplemental jurisdiction on Plaintiff's state law causes of action.

         Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint (ECF No. 29) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

         PROCEDURAL HISTORY

         On March 19, 2018, Plaintiff filed a pleading entitled COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS and an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. (ECF Nos. 1, 2).

         On April 6, 2018, the Magistrate Judge issued FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION TO: (1) DISMISS COMPLAINT WITH LIMITED LEAVE TO AMEND; (2) DENY PLAINTIFF'S APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN DISTRICT COURT WITHOUT PREPAYING FEES OR COSTS. (ECF No. 5).

         On May 11, 2018, the Court adopted the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation. (ECF No. 8).

         Also on May 11, 2018, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint and a second Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. (ECF Nos. 9, 10).

         On June 4, 2018, Plaintiff filed another pleading entitled PLAINTIFF NAPOLEON T. ANNAN-YARTEY'S AMENDED CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT. (ECF No. 19). The Court construed the pleading as a Second Amended Complaint.

         On June 18, 2018, the Magistrate Judge struck the Second Amended Complaint as Plaintiff exceeded the leave to amend granted in the Court's May 11, 2018 Order. (ECF No. 22).

         Also on June 18, 2018, Plaintiff paid the filing fee. (ECF No. 24).

         On June 19, 2018, the Magistrate Judge issued FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION TO: (1) DISMISS FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT WITH LIMITED LEAVE TO AMEND; AND (2) DENY PLAINTIFF'S APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN DISTRICT COURT WITHOUT PREPAYING FEES OR COSTS. (ECF No. 23).

         On June 29, 2018, Plaintiff filed a pleading entitled SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT. (ECF No. 25).

         On July 2, 2018, Plaintiff filed another pleading entitled AMENDED COPY SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT. (ECF No. 26).

         On July 12, 2018, the Court issued an Order Adopting the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation. (ECF No. 28). The Court also struck Plaintiff's filings entitled SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT (ECF No. 25) and AMENDED COPY SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT (ECF No. 26).

         On July 16, 2018, Plaintiff filed a Third Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 29).

         On July 31, 2018, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss. (ECF No. 31).

         On August 6, 2018, Plaintiff filed another pleading also entitled Third Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 34).

         On August 9, 2018, the Court struck Plaintiff's August 6, 2018 pleading. (ECF No. 35).

         On August 16, 2018, Plaintiff filed an Opposition. (ECF No. 37).

         On August 31, 2018, Plaintiff filed a Reply. (ECF No. 40).

         Pursuant to Local Rule 7.2(d), the Court elected to decide the matter without a hearing. (ECF No. 33).

         BACKGROUND

         Plaintiff has filed his fourth attempt to plead a cause of action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Defendant Securitas and the individually named Defendants. Plaintiff alleges that he is a Black male, Permanent Resident of the United States of America, who is domiciled in the State of Hawaii. (Third Amended Complaint at ¶ 4, ECF No. 29)

         Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Securitas Security Service, Inc. (hereinafter “Securitas”) “is a corporation duly existing by reason of and pursuant to the laws of the State of Hawaii.” (Id. at ¶ 5). Defendants Castro, Rodriguez, and Agapay are employed as security guards by Securitas. (Id. at ¶¶ 6-8). Defendant Roderick is employed as a Security Guard Supervisor by Securitas. (Id. at ¶ 9). Defendant Sappal is a Vice President of Securitas. (Id. at ¶ 10).

         Plaintiff alleges that on July 4, 2017, at 2:30 AM, he was falsely arrested and beaten by Defendants Agapay, Rodriguez and Castro while waiting for his flight at Honolulu International Airport. (Id. at ¶¶ 29-30). Plaintiff states that he was stopped by Defendants Agapay and Rodriguez as he was walking from his friend's vehicle toward the Delta Airline check-in counter. (Id. at ¶¶ 39-41). Defendant Rodriguez allegedly told Plaintiff, “I am detaining you.” (Id. at ΒΆ 41). Plaintiff ...


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.