Clarke v. City of North Las Vegas
2:24-cv-01046
| D. Nev. | Nov 12, 2024Background
- Plaintiff Karyl Clarke, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, brought claims against the City of North Las Vegas, Clark County School District (CCSD), certain school officials, and police officers regarding events from 2022–2023.
- Clarke alleged violations stemming from his attempts to assert parental rights and remove his daughter from Raul P. Elizondo Elementary School, where he faced obstacles and resistance from school personnel.
- Incidents included allegations that the school failed to honor his legal parentage, denied school access and records, falsely accused him of threats, and issued a trespass letter.
- Police and CCSD officers allegedly ordered Clarke’s arrest and detention at a family courthouse, and he claims to have been unlawfully searched, detained, and denied documentation.
- Clarke’s amended complaint brought sixteen causes of action, ranging from Fourth Amendment violations, state law torts, conspiracy, emotional distress, and municipal liability.
- The court performed a screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), granting leave to amend most dismissed claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fourth Amendment unlawful arrest | Arrest was ordered/occurred without probable cause | Not directly presented | Claim proceeds against Sgt. Evans; dismissed as to others |
| False imprisonment (Nevada law) | Detained and confined without lawful authority | Not directly presented | Proceeds vs. Sgt. Evans, Officer Doe #1, and CCSD |
| Excessive force (Fourth Amendment) | Officers used unnecessary/excessive force during arrest | Not directly presented | Dismissed, too conclusory; leave to amend |
| Defamation (and Due Process) | Principal made false, damaging statements affecting rights | Not directly presented | Proceeds against Principal Stacey/CCSD; as to 14A vs. Stacey |
| Assault and battery (state law) | Officers intentionally threatened/physically touched him | Not directly presented | Proceeds against Sgt. Evans, Officer Doe #1, CCSD |
| Negligence & emotional distress | Defendants owed and breached duties causing emotional/physical harm | Not directly presented | Proceeds against Principal Stacey, Sgt. Evans, CCSD |
| Municipal liability (42 U.S.C. § 1983) | Injury stemmed from policy, custom, or failure to train | Not directly presented | Dismissed as conclusory; leave to amend |
| Conspiracy under § 1983 | Defendants conspired to deprive civil rights | Not directly presented | Dismissed as conclusory; leave to amend |
Key Cases Cited
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (sets out pleading standards—conclusory allegations insufficient)
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (plausibility standard for pleadings under Rule 8)
- Monell v. Dep't of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658 (1978) (municipal liability under § 1983 must be predicated on policy or custom)
- City of Canton v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378 (1989) (failure-to-train liability for municipalities requires deliberate indifference)
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) (objectively reasonable use of force standard under the Fourth Amendment)
- Paul v. Davis, 424 U.S. 693 (1976) (defamation by a state actor requires stigma-plus for 14th Amendment claim)
- Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (1994) (deliberate indifference standard under Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments)
- Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000) (parental rights as a fundamental liberty interest under Due Process Clause)