Stark v. City of Memphis, 2:19-cv-02396

Background

Plaintiff Pamela Stark, then an Assistant District Attorney, alleges her MPD sergeant husband assaulted her on June 17, 2018; she claims supervisors discouraged reporting and the Shelby County DA’s office recused the matter.
Stark publicly criticized MPD on Facebook; a state circuit judge entered a restraining/injunction order limiting her social-media posts and she was barred from MPD property.
Stark alleges a broad conspiracy and retaliation involving MPD officers, City officials, the Shelby County DA (Weirich and Lepone), her husband Joe Stark, and his attorneys (Berry and Crawford), bringing claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985, the First and Fourteenth Amendments, Tennessee law, and state common law.
Magistrate Judge issued three Reports & Recommendations largely recommending dismissal of most federal and state claims against many defendants; some claims survived recommendation.
The district court adopted the three R&Rs, overruling objections, dismissed the bulk of federal and state claims against individual officials and some private parties, and allowed to proceed: First Amendment retaliation claim against the City of Memphis and Joe Stark, and state-law claims (intentional infliction of emotional distress and interference with business relations) against Joe Stark.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Jurisdiction/Younger and domestic relations abstention	Stark argued federal jurisdiction was proper; domestic-relations/Rooker-Feldman doctrines shouldn't bar her federal claims	Defendants urged abstention and/or dismissal under domestic relations doctrines	Court: Federal jurisdiction exists; Younger abstention bars injunctive relief tied to ongoing divorce proceedings but not dismissal of all federal claims
Conspiracy claims under §§ 1983/1985 (Weirich/Lepone; Berry/Crawford; others)	Stark alleged conspiracies to prevent reporting, to designate her as suspect, and to suppress speech	Defendants argued pleadings lack specific facts showing an agreement or protected-class comparator; many defendants are private actors	Court: Conspiracy claims dismissed for failure to plausibly allege an agreement, protected class or comparator; private-party §1983 liability not shown
Substantive and procedural due process (Fourteenth Amendment)	Stark contended denial of investigation and enforcement deprived her of fundamental rights	Defendants argued no fundamental interest or property right; Castle Rock bars claim to police enforcement	Court: Due process claims dismissed—no fundamental interest, no entitlement to investigation or enforcement under Castle Rock
First Amendment retaliation (ban from MPD property, injunction, alleged interference with prosecutions)	Stark asserts retaliation for protected speech (Facebook posts, complaints) resulting in ban, restraining order, and obstruction of prosecutions	Defendants contend social-media injunction and state-court acts are not actionable retaliation; timing and causation insufficient	Court: First Amendment retaliation claim survives against City and Joe Stark as plausibly pled; retaliation claims against many other defendants dismissed
Equal Protection / 'class-of-one' theory	Stark claims she was singled out for complaining about MPD and thus denied equal protection	Defendants: class-of-one not applicable; no comparator alleged; Browder and Sixth Circuit precedent limit relief	Court: Equal protection/class-of-one claims dismissed for lack of comparator or protected class membership
State-law claims (IIED, interference with business relations, false light/privacy)	Stark sought IIED and interference claims against various defendants, and privacy claims against some officials	Defendants sought dismissal (immunity, insufficient facts, voluntary resignation)	Court: IIED and interference with business relations survive as to Joe Stark; other state-law claims (against many officials) dismissed for failure to state claim or lack of factual support

Key Cases Cited

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (articulates plausibility pleading standard)
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (requires factual allegations raising claim above speculative level)
Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005) (no constitutional entitlement to police enforcement of restraining orders)
Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971) (principles of federal abstention where important state proceedings are pending)
Pennhurst State School & Hospital v. Halderman, 465 U.S. 89 (1984) (limits on federal relief against state officials)
Volunteer Medical Clinic, Inc. v. Operation Rescue, 948 F.2d 218 (6th Cir. 1991) (conspiracy pleading and §1985 guidance)
Browder v. Tipton, 630 F.2d 1149 (6th Cir. 1980) (equal protection/class-of-one context)
Matthews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261 (1976) (standard for district court review of magistrate recommendations)
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985) (procedural rules for objections to magistrate reports)