This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Civil Rights
Police Negligence
Excessive, Unreasonable and Unlawful Force

Niko McClaren v. The United States of America, Officer Jason Kupka, and Does 1 through 10, inclusive

Published: Nov. 15, 2014 | Result Date: Mar. 25, 2014 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 5:13-cv-01176-VAP-DTB Bench Decision –  Dismissal

Court

USDC Central


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Jamon R. Hicks
(Douglas Hicks Law APC)

Brian T. Dunn
(The Cochran Firm)

Megan R. Gyongyos
(Cochran Firm )


Defendant

Thomas K. Buck

Michael S. Geller
(Law Office of Michael Geller Inc)


Facts

Niko McClaren sued the United States and civilian officer Jason Kupka, in connection with an incident that occurred on May 27, 2011.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff alleged that on May 27, 2011, at approximately 8:30 p.m., he was walking near an intersection in Yucca Valley when Officer Kupka approached him. Kupka was a civilian officer employed by the U.S. Marine Corps. Kupka commanded him to stop, but plaintiff did not, so Kupka pursued him. Eventually, Kupka caught up with plaintiff and detained him. Plaintiff alleged that the officer had no probable cause to stop him. Plaintiff alleged that after Kupka detained him, Kupka then proceeded to assault and batter him, and even shot him in the back. Plaintiff claimed he sustained severe and permanent injuries as a result, and sued defendants alleging unlawful use of deadly force in violation of his civil rights. Plaintiff argued that the federal government was also liable for Kupka's conduct because he was acting within the scope of his employment as a federal officer.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
The federal government moved to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The U.S. argued that it was not liable for Kupka's actions because Kupka was not acting within the scope of his employment when he injured plaintiff. The U.S. government further claimed that Kupka was not on duty when he allegedly shot plaintiff, and that the alleged shooting occurred more than 25 miles outside the boundary of Kupka's policing jurisdiction. Moreover, defendant argued that Kupka used his personal weapon in the incident.

Result

The court granted the U.S. government's motion to dismiss for lack of subject jurisdiction. As such, the court dismissed McClaren's complaint against Kupka without prejudice.

Other Information

The case has been re-filed in San Bernardino Superior Court. FILING DATE: July 2, 2013.


#86196

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390