Vierria

Vierria v. California Highway Patrol

Good Law
644 F. Supp. 2d 1219·2009 WL 2390530·2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54477
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 23, 2009Civ. 09-305 FCD/GGHCalifornia11,580 words

Opinion

Opinion

Damrell, J.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter is before the court on defendants’, California Highway Patrol (“CHP”), Tim Castle (“Castle”), State Compensation Insurance Fund (“SCIF”), and Christopher J. Devereux (“Devereux”), motions to dismiss plaintiff Jovita Vierria’s (“plaintiff’ or “Vierria”) complaint, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Vierria opposes the motions.

Vierria’s complaint alleges eleven causes of action: (1) violation of the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961 et seq., against all defendants; (2) violation of the right to equal protection, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“Section 1983”), against CHP and Castle; (3) violation of the right to freedom of speech, Section 1983 and 42 U.S.C. § 1985 , against Castle and Devereux; (4) taking of property, Section 1983, against all defendants; (5) violation of the right to privacy, Section 1983, against all defendants; (6) violation of the Public Safety Officers’ Bill of Rights (“POBR”), Cal. Gov’t Code §§ 3303 et seq., against all defendants; (7) Retaliation for Whistleblowing, Cal. Lab. Code § 1102.5 , against CHP; (8) discrimination, retaliation, and harassment in violation of the…

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.