STATE OF RIDGEWAY
SUPERIOR COURT
EXECUTERMAX )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No.: RSC-CV-2157
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Presiding Judge: Hon. koala4Iife
Before: Hon. Arthur_Chen, Magistrate
Plaintiff
v.
KEVIN0202OOO
Defendant
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS CAUSE is based on Defendant KEVIN0202OOO ’s motion, by and through counsel, to dismiss
the underlying civil action for Failure to State a Claim. Upon due consideration of the motion, the Court has
examined the legal grounds presented by the defendant's counsel, as well as the opposing arguments. The
motion is DENIED.
I. LEGAL STANDARD
When deciding a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(5), modeled after Rule 12(b)(6) of the F.R.Civ.P.,
the court must accept as true all factual allegations in the complaint as true to “state a claim to relief that is
plausible on its face” and must draw inferences in a light most favorable to the plaintiff. See Scheuer v. Rhodes,
416 U.S. 232, 236 (1974). A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows
the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged. The
plausibility standard is not akin to a “probability requirement,” but it asks for more than a sheer possibility that
a defendant has acted unlawfully. Bell Atlantic Corp v. Twombly, 550 U. S. 544, 555 (2006) (internal citations
omitted). A complaint “should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that
the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief.” Conley v.
Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957). See also Hishon v. King & Spaulding, 467 U.S. 69, 73 (1984). The function
of a motion to dismiss is “merely to assess the legal feasibility of the complaint, not to assay the weight of the
evidence which might be offered in support thereof.” Ryder Energy Distribution v. Merrill Lynch Commodities,
Inc., 748 F.2d 774, 779 (2d Cir. 1984). The issue on a motion to dismiss is not whether the plaintiff will prevail,
but whether the plaintiff is entitled to offer evidence to support his claims. See Scheuer, 416 U.S. at 232. Within
our own Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 8(a) dictates what valid claims must contain:
A pleading which sets forth a claim for relief, whether an original claim, counterclaim,
cross-claim, or third-party claim shall contain (1) a short and plain statement of the claim
showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, and (2) a demand for judgment for the relief to
which he deems himself entitled. Relief in the alternative or of several different types may be
demanded.
(Rid.R.Civ.P. 8).
II. DISCUSSION
The Complaint alleges that on April 3rd, 2024, Defendant KEVIN0202OOO, without legal cause or
justification, shot and killed Plaintiff executermax, thereby committing Wrongful Death under 1 R. Stat. § 3109.
The Defendant argues that the Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, warranting
dismissal under Rule 12(b)(5).
However, the Complaint clearly sets forth a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the
Plaintiff is entitled to relief, as required by Rid.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2). It alleges facts that, if true, demonstrate that
Defendant KEVIN0202OOO intentionally and wrongfully caused the death of Plaintiff executermax without
legal justification. These allegations, taken as true for the purposes of this motion, are sufficient to state a claim
for Wrongful Death that is plausible on its face.
The Supreme Court in Twombly and Iqbal clarified that a complaint must allege sufficient factual matter,
accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face. The Complaint in the present case meets
this standard by detailing the circumstances of the alleged wrongful death, including the date, location, and
actions of the Defendant.
Furthermore, the Complaint aligns with the principles set forth in Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 (1957),
which emphasized that a complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond
doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief.
Although Twombly and Iqbal have refined the pleading standard, they do not negate the principle that a
well-pleaded complaint should proceed past the motion to dismiss stage if it plausibly suggests an entitlement to
relief.
III. CONCLUSION / ORDER
The Court finds that the Complaint sufficiently alleges facts that, if proven, would entitle the Plaintiff to
relief for the offenses alleged. Accordingly, Defendant KEVIN0202OOO's Motion to Dismiss for Failure to
State a Claim under Rule 12(b)(5) is DENIED.
SIGNED,
Hon. Arthur_Chen
Magistrate Judge
