Anderson v. West Memphis City of

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS NORTHERN DIVISION

JOHN ANDERSON PLAINTIFF

No. 3:19-cv-255-DPM

CITY OF WEST MEMPHIS; MARCO McCLENDON, Mayor, in his official capacity; E. C. WEST, Chief, in his official capacity; LARTERRIOUS JOHNSON, Officer, individually and in his official capacity; SOUTHLAND RACING CORPORATION, d/b/a Southland Casino Racing; and PHAISON BOSTON, Security Manager, Individually and as an agent on behalf of Southland Casino Racing DEFENDANTS

ORDER Anderson, a black man, wouldn’t show his ID to Southland’s security manager, Boston, or leave the premises. Officer Johnson arrived after being contacted by Southland security. He arrested Anderson -— physically and verbally assaulting him, Anderson says, in the process. Anderson was eventually acquitted of an unspecified misdemeanor. He has sued Officer Johnson, the West Memphis police chief, the West Memphis mayor, the city, Southland, and Boston. Anderson claims the non-city defendants conspired with the officer and city to violate Anderson’s civil rights, contrary to 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3). He brings 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims against the city defendants; as best

the Court can tell, Anderson directs these claims against Southland and Boston, too. Ne 12 at F§ 1, 27. Southland’s and Boston’s joint motion to dismiss is well taken. The only alleged interaction between them and public officials is that unnamed Southland security staff contacted Officer Johnson. Anderson hasn't pleaded with particularity any agreement or meeting of the minds between Southland and any public official; he therefore hasn't stated a § 1985 claim. Kellyv. City of Omaha, Nebraska, 813 F.3d 1070, 1077-78 (8th Cir. 2016). Likewise, his § 1983 claims against Southland and Boston fail for lack of alleged joint activity between them and any public officials. Magee v. Trustees of Hamline University, Minnesota, 747 F.3d 532, 536 (8th Cir. 2014). eo □ Motion, Ne 14, granted as modified: the amended complaint is dismissed without prejudice as to Southland and Boston for failure to state a claim. The complaint is murky as to Anderson’s allegations under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the remaining defendants. The Court grants Anderson leave to file a second amended complaint against those defendants by 17 January 2020. If Anderson doesn’t do so, then the Court will dismiss his amended complaint without prejudice.

-2-

So Ordered. TP Ip. D.P. Marshall Jr. United States District Judge 3 Jan wy A0aAO

3.