Preview:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS CIVIL ACTION NO. 09-11491-RGS DALE ROBINSON v. KATHLEEN CARNEY, HARI ARISETTY, CITY OF MILTON,1 and JOHN DOES 1 and 2 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS TO DISMISS January 20, 2010 STEARNS, D.J. On February 20, 2009, Dale Robinson, acting pro se, filed this civil rights action in Suffolk Superior Court against Massachusetts State Troopers Kathleen Carney and Hari Arisetty.2 Arisetty removed the case to this court on September 9, 2009, on federal question grounds. On October 9, 2009, Arisetty filed a motion to dismiss, and on November 16, 2009, Carney followed suit. While Robinson has opposed Arisetty's motion, he has not filed an opposition to Carney's motion.

1

Although Robinson names the "City" of Milton as a defendant, Milton is in fact a

town. Robinson additionally names two "John Doe" State Police officers. A plaintiff has a right "to proceed against a `John Doe' defendant whose identity can only be established through discovery. This principle of fairness recognizes that a plaintiff in the heat of a confrontation with police may not know or have the opportunity to learn the identity of the alleged wrongdoer. Once that identity is discovered, a plaintiff is permitted under the liberal regime of Rule 15 to substitute the true defendant for the fictitious `John Doe.'" Wilson v. Town of Mendon, 294 F.3d 1, 7 n.16 (1st Cir. 2002). A district court, however, is not obligated to "wait indefinitely for [a plaintiff] to take steps to identify and serve . . . `unknown' defendants." Glaros v. Perse, 628 F.2d 679, 685 (1st Cir. 1980).
2

BACKGROUND The allegations of the Complaint, which are deemed to be true for present purposes, are as follows. On February 10, 2006, Robinson, a black male, was driving south on Route 93 outside of Boston. He was pulled over by Carney and Arisetty at a Braintree exit. When Arisetty asked Robinson for his driver's license and registration, Robinson "clumsily manipulated" his cell phone. Arisetty ordered Robinson to put down the phone and produce his license and registration. Robinson responded, "I'm just starting the record function on my phone to record this transaction."3 Arisetty expressed no objection. Robinson gave his license to Arisetty, who returned to his cruiser. After a record check, Arisetty cited Robinson for failing to signal, a lane violation, and a seat belt violation. Arisetty explained the citations to Robinson and informed him of his right to contest the citations. See Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 90C,

Download 30572.pdf

Massachusetts Law