STATE OF RIDGEWAY
EPIDERMISGUPTA69
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
DOCKET NO. RSC-CV-856
JUDGE. HON. AlexJCabot
Plaintiff
v.
ICITRUZX
Defendant
MOTION TO DISMISS
The State of Ridgeway, on behalf of Defendant iCitruzx, respectfully submit this motion
to dismiss. The court should dismiss this suit because the Plaintiff has failed to sufficiently plead
his claim in his civil complaint. Indeed, Plaintiff offers no assertions of fact with respect to the
defendant’s knowing intent — a requirement for the claim to move forward.
ARGUMENT
In order to be found liable of official misconduct, a plaintiff must show (1) the defendant
is a public servant, (2) the defendant “commits an act relating to his office but constitutes an
unauthorized exercise of his official functions” and (3) that the defendant did so “knowing that
such act is unauthorized.” See 1 R. Stat. § 3114. While the Plaintiff states in their civil complaint
that the Defendant in the above-titled matter “knowingly and intentionally effected an illegal
search,” he offers no factual allegations to support the conclusion that the officer “knowing”
effectuated an allegedly illegal search.
The “formulaic recitation of elements of a cause of action will not do.” Bell Atlantic
Corp. v. Twombly, 550 US 544 (2007). Indeed, “while legal conclusions can provide the
framework of a complaint, they must be supported by factual allegations.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556
US 662 (2009). Threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere
conclusory statements, do not suffice. Ibid. Pleadings must contain a short and plain statement of
fact that “possess enough heft to show that the pleader is entitled to relief,” meaning that “factual
allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” Bell Atlantic
Corp. v. Twombly, supra.
Since the Plaintiff fails to provide any factual allegations in support of his legal
conclusion that the officer acted knowingly, this court must dismiss the matter, consistent with
caselaw from this nation’s highest court. Indeed, for this case to proceed, the civil complaint, and
all the facts therein, must be “plausible on [their] face.” See Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly,
supra, 570 (2007). Even if all the facts of the civil complaint were taken as true, it would not be
enough for this complaint to follow through and continue in this court. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal,
supra, 664 (2009) (Holding that claims can be dismissed if the facts pleaded do not entitle the
Plaintiff to relief). Without alleging a factual basis for the claim and conclusion thereof, this case
must be dismissed.
CONCLUSION
Since the Plaintiff has failed to establish the required factual basis for his claim, this court
must dismiss the case. The State humbly requests this court do just that.
totoro987123
Solicitor General
Department of Justice
Counsel of Record
Dated: 01/08/22
