Figueroa-Ramos v. Molina-Rodriguez et al, No. 3:2010cv01179 - Document 21 (D.P.R. 2011)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER granting 13 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge Jay A Garcia-Gregory on 2/8/2011. (LL) (ab).

Download PDF

Figueroa-Ramos v. Molina-Rodriguez et al Doc. 21 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO HENRY FIGUEROA RAMOS, Plaintiff(s) CIVIL NO. 10-1179 (JAG) v. CARLOS MOLINA RODRIGUEZ, et al., Defendant(s) OPINION AND ORDER GARCIA-GREGORY, D.J. Before Plaintiffs the § Court 1983 is Defendants Complaint for Motion civil to rights Dismiss violations. (Docket No. 13). For the reasons set forth, the Court GRANTS Defendant s motion. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Plaintiff custody of (hereinafter, rights Henry the (hereinafter, Puerto DC ) violations Figueroa Ramos, Rico brings against this the Commonwealth ), a prisoner Department § 1983 of DC, and of the Corrections complaint Commonwealth the under for Puerto Carlos civil Rico Molina as Secretary of the DC (hereinafter Secretary Molina ). Plaintiff alleges he has suffered damages as a result of the Defendants policy of allowing the sale of cigarettes within the prison wherein Plaintiff lives. As the cigarette trade disseminated Dockets.Justia.com 2 throughout the prison Plaintiff s asthma and condition more inmates worsened. began Plaintiff smoking, now claims money damages for injuries suffered due to smoke inhalation. STANDARD OF REVIEW Motion to Dismiss Standard of Review Pursuant move to to Fed.R.Civ.P. dismiss an Rule action 12(b)(1), for lack a of defendant subject may matter jurisdiction. As courts of limited jurisdiction, federal courts have the duty of narrowly construing jurisdictional grants. See e.g., Alicea-Rivera v. SIMED, 12 F.Supp.2d 243, 245 (D.P.R. 1998). Since federal courts have limited jurisdiction, the party asserting jurisdiction has the burden of demonstrating the existence of federal jurisdiction. See Murphy v. United States, 45 F.3d 520, 522 (1st Cir. 1995); Diaz Serrano v. Caribbean Records Inc., 270 F.Supp.2d 217 (D.P.R. 2003). When deciding whether to dismiss a complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, the Court may consider whatever evidence has been submitted, such as . . . depositions and exhibits. See Aversa v. United federal States, 99 jurisdiction F.3d is 1200, premised 1210 on (1st the Cir. 1996). diversity When statute, courts must determine whether complete diversity exists among all plaintiffs and all defendants. Casas Office Machines v. Mita Copystar America, Inc., 42 F.3d 668, 673 (1st Cir. 1994). 3 Motions brought under Rule 12(b)(1) are subject to the same standard of review as Rule 12(b)(6) motions. Negron-Gaztambide v. Hernandez-Torres, 35 F.3d 25, 27 (1st Cir. 1994); Torres Maysonet v. Drillex, S.E., 229 F.Supp.2d 105, 107 (D.P.R. 2002). Under Rule 12 (b)(6), dismissal is proper only if it clearly appears, cannot according recover on Hernandez-Arencibia, to the facts any viable 221 F.3d alleged, theory. 45, 48 that the plaintiff Gonzalez-Morales (1st Cir. v. 2000)(quoting Correa-Martinez v. Arrillaga-Belendez, 903 F.2d 49, 52 (1st Cir. 1990)). Under Rule 12(b)(1) dismissal would be proper if the facts alleged reveal a jurisdictional defect not otherwise remediable. DISCUSSION The Eleventh Amendment bars suits against states for money damages unless the state has consented. See Metcalf & Eddy v. P.R. Aqueduct & Sewer Authority, 991 F.2d 935, 938 (1st Cir. 1993); In re San Juan Dupont Plaza Hotel Fire Lit., 888 F.2d 940, 942 (1st Cir. 1989); Ramirez v. P.R. Fire Serv., 715 F.2d 694, 697 (1st Cir. 1983).1 Eleventh Amendment Immunity extends to 1 The Eleventh Amendment provides that: the judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or subjects of any Foreign State. U.S. Const. Amend XI. Puerto Rico is considered a state for Eleventh Amendment purposes. See Bernier-Aponte v. Izquierdo-Encarnacion, 196 F.Supp.2d 93, 98 (D.P.R. 2002)(citing Negron Gaztambide v. Hernandez Torres, 145 F.3d 410 (1st Cir. 1998)). 4 arms or alter egos of Cardiovascular Resources, Cardiovascular Center the Inc. Corp., State. v. 322 Fresenius Puerto F.3d Medical Rico 56 and (1st Care Caribbean Cir. 2003); Bernier-Aponte v. Izquierdo-Encarnacion, 196 F.Supp.2d 93, 98-99 (D.P.R. 2002). Similarly, suits filed against state officials in their official capacity are deemed actions against the state, whether the state is or is not the named party to the suit, since the real party in interest is the State and not the official. Hafer v. Melo, 502 U.S. 21 (1991); Will v. Mich. Dep t of State Police, 491 U.S. 58 (1989). Even when state officials act under color of state law pursuant to § 1983, the Eleventh Amendment bars monetary claims against them in their official capacity. (1st Id. at 98-99; see also Kostka v. Hogg, 560 F.2d 37 Cir. persons, a 1977). suit Although against a state state officials official in are his literally official capacity is not a suit against the official, but rather a suit against the official s office. Bernier-Aponte, 196 F.Supp.2d at 98. The Commonwealth of Puerto Rico has not consented to suit in federal Court for actions under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Therefore, Plaintiff s claim for money damages against the Commonwealth is barred by the Eleventh Amendment. Metcalf, 991 F.2d at 938. Plaintiff s claim for money damages against the DC, an arm of the Commonwealth, is also barred by the Eleventh Amendment. 5 Fresenius, 322 F.3d at 56. Finally, inasmuch as Secretary Molina is being sued in his official capacity, Plaintiff s claim for money damages against him is also barred by the Eleventh Amendment. Hafer, 502 U.S. at 25. CONCLUSION For the reasons stated above, the Court hereby GRANTS Defendant s Motion to Dismiss. IT IS SO ORDERED. In San Juan, Puerto Rico, this 8th day of February, 2011. S/Jay A. Garcia-Gregory JAY A. GARCIA-GREGORY United States District Judge

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.