Kagel
Kagel v. Raftery
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
PETER KAGEL, Case No. 20-cv-05809-VC Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
V. DISMISS
JAY LAURENCE RAFTERY, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 11 Defendants.
The motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction is granted. Because Kagel seeks the same relief (namely, attorneys’ fees) that the state court denied him in Linton v. County of Contra Costa, 31 Cal. App. 5th. 628 (2019), this case almost certainly constitutes a collateral attack on a state court decision over which this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. Bell v. City of Boise, 709 F.3d 890, 897 (9th Cir. 2013). But even if that were not the case, Kagel has not pled sufficient facts to support a finding of subject matter jurisdiction on the basis of either a federal question or diversity. It appears highly unlikely that Kagel could amend the complaint in a way that would allow him to proceed in federal court. Nonetheless, in an abundance of caution, dismissal is with leave to amend. Any amended complaint must be filed within 14 days of this order.