United States District Court, D. Maryland.Margie Lemon RAFFETY and Robert RaymondRaffety, Plaintiffs,v.PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY et al., Defendants.
Civ. A. No. M-75-768.
Nov. 1, 1976.Plaintiffs, a white husband and black wife, whosethree children had been killed in fire which des-troyed the family's home, brought action againstcounty and certain members of police and fire de-partments to recover for denial of civil rights as aresult of alleged maliciously and racially motivatedinvestigation of the fire. On motions to dismiss, theDistrict Court, James R. Miller, Jr., J., held thatcomplaint stated cause of action against the policeofficers who conducted the investigation and theirsuperiors who allegedly had adopted policies de-signed to deny equal protection to blacks and per-sons who associate with them; that the qualified im-munity enjoyed by the superior officers could notsupport motion to dismiss; the court would exercisependent jurisdiction over state law claims based ondefamation, invasion of privacy, false imprison-ment, and intentional infliction of willful distrust;that the complaint set forth cause of action for mon-etary and equitable relief against county under civilrights statute guaranteeing all persons the sameright to full and equal benefit of all laws and pro-ceedings for the security of persons and property asis enjoyed by white citizens; that the 14th amend-ment does not create a cause of action for damages;and that the jurisdictional amount was present.Order accordingly.West Headnotes
78Civil Rights78IIIFederal Remedies in General78k1392Pleading
78k1396k. Color of State Law; State Ac-tion.Most Cited Cases(Formerly 78k236, 78k13.12(8))Allegations that husband and wife were subjectedto unwarranted detention, interrogation, and sub-sequent investigation by officers who were raciallymotivated and who did not have probable causewere sufficient to state a claim under civil rightsstatute dealing with deprivation of rights under col-or of law; complaint did not merely seek damagesfor failure of police officers to give Miranda warn-ings.42 U.S.C.A. § 1983.
Federal Courts 170B 15
170BFederal Courts170BIJurisdiction and Powers in General170BI(A)In General
170Bk14Jurisdiction of Entire Contro-versy; Pendent Jurisdiction170Bk15k.Federal Question Cases in
General, Claims Pendent To.Most Cited Cases(Formerly 106k263(5))Federal court which had jurisdiction over claimsagainst police officers and fire department investig-ators and their superiors under civil rights statutewould exercise pendent jurisdiction over stateclaims based on defamation, negligence, assault,false imprisonment, invasion of privacy, and inflic-tion of willful distress.28 U.S.C.A. § 1331;42
U.S.C.A. § 1983.
Federal Civil Procedure 170A 633.1
(Cite as: 423 F.Supp. 1045)
© 2010 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works.