Tisdale

Tisdale v. City of Los Angeles

Caution
617 F. Supp. 2d 1003·2009 WL 1160052·2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40740
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaApril 27, 2009Case CV 08-8523 AHM (RZx)California1,931 words

Opinion

Opinion

Matz, J.

Plaintiff Reginald Jerome Tisdale has sued Defendants City of Los Angeles, Greyhound Lines, Inc. (“Greyhound”), and ten Does (including five Los Angeles Police Department (“LAPD”) officers and five Greyhound security guards) for alleged injuries arising from his arrest at a Los Angeles Greyhound bus station and his subsequent detention in a City jail. Greyhound has moved to strike three of the six claims against it, arguing that the claims arise from its privileged reports to law enforcement personnel and are precluded by California’s anti-SLAPP statute and the federal Noerr-Pennington doctrine. The Court DENIES the motion because the claims are based upon a citizen’s arrest of Plaintiff, not on any privileged communications with the LAPD officers. Citizen’s arrests are not privileged under the anti-SLAPP statute or the Noerr-Pennington doctrine.

I. PLAINTIFF’S ALLEGATIONS

Tisdale alleges that on or about Monday, January 8, 2007, he politely but repeatedly asked employees at the Los Angeles Greyhound bus station for assistance in changing his connecting bus destined for a consumer electronics convention. In response, a security guard employed or contracted by Greyhound allegedly…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.