2020 DNH 2
D.N.H.2020Background
- Plaintiff Roderick Webber (pro se) alleges he was assaulted and forcibly removed at a No Labels "Problem Solvers" event in Manchester, NH on October 12, 2015; defendants include No Labels, XMark (Deck's company), Trump Campaign/Trump Organizations, President Donald J. Trump, Edward Deck, Fred Doucette, and off‑duty Manchester police officers.
- Webber filed a second amended complaint asserting 18 counts (state torts and multiple § 1983 claims) against various subsets of defendants.
- Multiple defendants moved to dismiss: No Labels, XMark, the Trump Organizations, and President Trump.
- The court granted No Labels’ motion (all claims dismissed), granted the Trump Organizations’ motion (no personal jurisdiction), granted President Trump’s motion (failure to state a claim), and denied XMark’s motion (claims against XMark related back to the original complaint and are timely).
- Key legal focal points: vicarious liability/agency for hired off‑duty officers; whether private actors were acting under color of state law for § 1983; negligence duty and foreseeability; statute of limitations and Rule 15(c) relation‑back; personal jurisdiction over national entities; and whether suit against a sitting president should proceed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Vicarious liability of No Labels for police/security torts | Webber: No Labels hired the off‑duty officers as security and thus is vicariously liable | No Labels: officers were independent contractors; no control showing agency | Court: dismissed state torts against No Labels — alleged payment alone insufficient to show employer control/agency |
| 2. State‑action liability under § 1983 (No Labels & private actors) | Webber: No Labels and private actors conspired/jointly acted with police to deprive rights | Defendants: private entities are not state actors; conspiracy/joint action not plausibly pled | Court: dismissed § 1983 claims vs No Labels and Trump — allegations were conclusory and lacked detailed facts of joint action |
| 3. Negligence / duty to protect (No Labels) | Webber: No Labels owed duty to prevent assaults by security/police; negligent hiring/supervision | No Labels: no duty shown; no foreseeability that officers would assault Webber | Court: dismissed negligence and negligent hiring claims — plaintiff failed to plead foreseeability or specific duty |
| 4. Statute of limitations / relation back (XMark) | Webber: claims against XMark relate back to original complaint under Rule 15(c); discovery rule/fraudulent concealment alternatively | XMark: claims are time‑barred; no mistake as to party identity for relation back | Court: denied XMark's motion — relation back satisfied because plaintiff mistakenly identified Deck’s employer and XMark should have known identity |
| 5. Personal jurisdiction over Trump Organizations | Webber: contacts (payments, campaign appearances) suffice for general/specific jurisdiction in NH | Trump Orgs: insufficient forum contacts; no facts showing purposeful availment | Court: dismissed all claims for lack of personal jurisdiction — plaintiff failed to adduce specific facts establishing minimum contacts |
| 6. Claims against President Trump (alter ego, vicarious, state actor) | Webber: Trump is alter ego of campaign/orgs, vicariously liable, or acted jointly with police | Trump: no alter ego pleaded; no facts showing Trump's personal involvement or joint action with police | Court: dismissed claims vs Trump — no plausible allegations of alter ego, vicarious liability, or concerted state action; suit did not implicate separation‑of‑powers concerns |
Key Cases Cited
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (pleading standard: factual content must allow reasonable inference of liability)
- Breiding v. Eversource Energy, 939 F.3d 47 (1st Cir.) (Rule 12(b)(6) pleading review and inference drawing)
- Dennis v. Sparks, 449 U.S. 24 (private party may be treated as state actor if willful participant in joint action with state officials)
- McGillicuddy v. Clements, 746 F.2d 76 (1st Cir.) (civil‑rights conspiracy/joint action must be pled in some detail)
- Leonard v. Perry, 219 F.3d 25 (1st Cir.) (Rule 15(c) relation‑back framework for adding parties)
- Daimler AG v. Bauman, 571 U.S. 117 (general jurisdiction requires affiliations so continuous and systematic as to render defendant at home)
- Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462 (minimum contacts and purposeful availment for personal jurisdiction)
- Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731 (separation‑of‑powers concerns in suits against the President)
- Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681 (private suits against a sitting president for unofficial acts may proceed)
- Tessier v. Rockefeller, 162 N.H. 324 (employer vicarious liability under NH law)
- Dent v. Exeter Hosp., Inc., 155 N.H. 787 (control/agency test for when an independent contractor relationship gives rise to vicarious liability)
- Arthur v. Holy Rosary Credit Union, 139 N.H. 463 (independent contractor rule and exceptions under NH law)