Saxton

DISCUSSION

21 In an order filed March 30, 2023, the Court ruled on defendants’ motion to dismiss the first 22 amended complaint. The Court (1) dismissed defendants Sheriff Essick and the Sheriff’s 23 Department; (2) instructed McGinnis to clarify the constitutional bases of the first and second causes 24 of action – both brought against the County under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Monell v. Dep’t of Social 25 Servs., 436 U.S. 658 (1978) – as well as the capacities in which those causes of action were brought; 26 and (3) held that the Monell allegations were insufficient to state a claim. Dkt. No. 25. As to the 27 first and second causes of action based on a violation of her own rights as the mother of the decedent Amber Marcotte, or as a survivorship claim based on a violation of Marcotte’s rights. The Court also noted that the complaint was unclear regarding whether both causes of action alleged a violation of McGinnis’s Fourteenth Amendment right to familial association. The Court informed McGinnis: Further, because the first cause of action asserts Monell liability based on policies and practices and is brought pursuant to the Fourteenth…