United States District Court, D. Utah
JANET CRANE, as Administrator of the Estate of BROCK TURNER, Plaintiff,
UTAH DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ALFRED BIGELOW, RICHARD GARDEN, DON TAYLOR, OFFICER COX, BRENT PLATT, SUSAN BURKE, FUTURES THROUGH CHOICES, INC., UNIVERSAL HEALTH SERVICES, INC., and JEREMY COTTLE, Defendants.
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER DISMISSING FTC AND
NUFFER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDG
Janet Crane, as Administrator of the Estate of Brock Turner,
filed a pro se civil-rights complaint, see
42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 (2017). The case stems from
BrockTurner's suicide while in state custody.
Futures Through Choices (FTC) and Jeremy Cottle have moved
separately to be dismissed from the case. The se motions are
granted, but on grounds different than those argued in the
motions. These grounds are raised sua
sponte by the court.
Standard for Dismissal
evaluating the propriety of dismissing a defendant for
failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted,
all well-pleaded factual assertions are taken as true and
regarded in a light most advantageous to the plaintiff.
Ridge at Red Hawk L.L.C. v. Schneider, 493 F.3d
1174, 1177 (10th Cir. 2007). Dismissal is appropriate when,
viewing those facts as true, the plaintiff has not posed a
“plausible” right to relief. See Bell Atl.
Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007); Robbins
v. Oklahoma, 519 F.3d 1242, 1247-48 (10th Cir. 2008).
“The burden is on the plaintiff to frame a
‘complaint with enough factual matter (taken as true)
to suggest' that he or she is entitled to relief.”
Robbins, 519 F.3d at 1247 (quoting Twombly,
550 U.S. at 556). When a civil rights complaint contains
“bare assertions, ” involving “nothing more
than a ‘formulaic recitation of the elements' of a
constitutional . . . claim, ” the Court considers those
assertions “conclusory and not entitled to” an
assumption of truth. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct.
1937, 1951 (2009) (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at
554-55). In other words, “the mere metaphysical
possibility that some plaintiff could prove
some set of facts in support of the pleaded claims
is insufficient; the complaint must give the court reason to
believe that this plaintiff has a reasonable
likelihood of mustering factual support for these
claims.” Red Hawk, 493 F.3d at 1177 (italics
There Are Few Factual Allegations as to FTC and
Fourth Claim for Relief in the Amended Complaint (at p. 30)
lumps together several defendants, including FTC and Cottle,
as Utah Division of Child and Family Services (DCFS)
Defendants. Otherwise, there are few allegations directly
stated against FTC and Cottle.
identifying FTC, the Amended Complaint states:
Defendant [FTC] is a private 501(c)(3) corporation, located
in Bountiful, Utah. At all relevant times, FTC was operating
under contract with DCFS, received juveniles via in-custody
detention, and was acting under color of law. At all relevant
times, FTC employed the staff member(s) who physically
assaulted Brock while Brock was involuntarily confined at its
facility in 2008.
(See Docket Entry # 39, ¶ 30.)
Cottle, the Amended Complaint reads:
[Defendant Cottle], at all relevant times, was the CEO and
Managing Director of Provo Canyon School, who failed to
provide adequate mental health treatment to Brock, failed to
provide reasonably safe conditions of confinement, failed to
adequately train and supervise the staff, and further failed
to protect Brock from being subjected to inhumane conditions
as well as from being physically attacked by staff members.
(See id., at ¶ 16.) Other than this, Defendant
Cottle is not mentioned by name in ...