STATE OF RIDGEWAY
COUNTY OF RIDGEWAY
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
THE STATE OF RIDGEWAY
TOBYRULLES4568,
Plaintiff(s),
v.
ARTHUR_CHEN,
TROOPER_NOVICH,
Defendant(s).
Case Number: RSC-CV-3102
Presiding: Hon. notsfeelings
MOTION TO DISMISS
MOTION TO DISMISS
COUNTER-DEFENDANTS, Arthur_Chen and Trooper_Novich, by and through the
undersigned counsel, submits this motion in the above-entitled matter, pursuant to Rid. R. Civ. P.
12(a), and moves the court to. Attached hereto and herewith is a memorandum of law in support
of the motion to dismiss.
June 24, 2024 Respectfully submitted,
MatthewSandringham
Counsel of Record
Clarke, Feelings & Associates, LLP.
Managing Partner
R. Bar. No. 16103
Attorney for Plaintiff
LAW OFFICES OF CLARKE, FEELINGS & ASSOCIATES, LLP.
- 1 -
STATE OF RIDGEWAY
COUNTY OF RIDGEWAY
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
THE STATE OF RIDGEWAY
TOBYRULLES4568,
Plaintiff(s),
v.
ARTHUR_CHEN,
TROOPER_NOVICH,
Defendant(s).
Case Number: RSC-CV-3102
Presiding: Hon. notsfeelings
MEMORANDUM OF LAW
MEMORANDUM OF LAW
COUNTER-DEFENDANTS, Arthur_Chen and Trooper_Novich, by and through the
undersigned counsel, by and through the undersigned counsel, submits this memorandum of
points and authorities in support of the motion to dismiss.
INTRODUCTION
Counter-Defendants submits this motion to dismiss the counterclaims for failure to state a
claim upon which relief can be granted.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
In order to survive a Rule 12(a)(5) dismissal motion, the court must assess whether the
complaint “contains sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is
plausible on its face.’” xLazerify v. StudsPerSeconds, 1 Rid, 101, 109 (2023), (quoting Ashcroft
v. Iqbal, 556, U.S. 662, 678 (2009), Bell Atlantic Company v. Twombly, 550, U.S. 544, 570
(2007)). For the court to accept that the complaint has facial plausibility the plaintiff must plead
“factual content” that allows the court to draw inferences.
When assessing “factual content”, the court must acknowledge that a “mere formulaic
recitation of a cause of action will not do”, Twombly, ibid.
When there is no showing of “facial plausibility” the court should order dismissal. The
dismissal should be with prejudice - for the court shall treat the dismissal for failure to state a
claim as a “judgment on the merits”, Plant v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc., 514 U.S. 211, 229 (1995).
ARGUMENTS
I. ALLEGATIONS DO NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR ABUSE OF A
LEGAL PROCESS
On the counter-plaintiff’s sole cause of action, they allege the Counter-Defendant’s
abused a legal process simply by filing a civil complaint. When proving an allegation of abuse of
a legal process, Counter-Plaintiff must show 1) cross-plaintiff is a party to a legal process
initiated by cross-defendant; 2) the legal process was initiated for the predominant purpose of
furthering some indirect, collateral and improper objective; 3) the cross-defendant took or made
a definite act or threat in furtherance of the improper purpose; and 4) some measure of special
damage has resulted.
LAW OFFICES OF CLARKE, FEELINGS & ASSOCIATES, LLP.
- 2 -
In the Counter-claims, we can see that Counter-Plaintiff has shown that Cross-Plaintiff is
party to a legal process - and as such satisfies the first element of the claim. We then move to the
second element, in which the Counter-Plaintiff very clearly has failed to make any factual
showing that the legal process was initiated for an “indirect, collateral and improper objective”,
as such they fail on the second element. We then move to the third element, which once again the
Counter-Plaintiff fails to make any factual showing that the cross-defendant “took or made a
definite act or threat in furtherance of the improper purpose” and as such, they fail on the third
element of their claim. We then move to the fourth and final element, which we can see that the
counter-plaintiff had failed to make any showing of a “special damage”.
When the Counter-Plaintiff fails to make sufficient factual allegations that makes the
claim plausible on its face, the court cannot proceed with the claim. In this case, the
Counter-Plaintiff has failed to satisfy 3 out of 4 elements of the tort, and simply fails to meet the
burden set in xLazerify.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, we ask the court to dismiss the counterclaims with prejudice.
June 24, 2024 Respectfully submitted,
MatthewSandringham
Counsel of Record
Clarke, Feelings & Associates, LLP.
Associate Attorney
R. Bar. No. 16103
Attorney for Plaintiff
LAW OFFICES OF CLARKE, FEELINGS & ASSOCIATES, LLP.
- 3 -
STATE OF RIDGEWAY
COUNTY OF RIDGEWAY
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
THE STATE OF RIDGEWAY
TOBYRULLES4568,
Plaintiff(s),
v.
ARTHUR_CHEN,
TROOPER_NOVICH,
Defendant(s).
Case Number: RSC-CV-3102
Presiding: Hon. notsfeelings
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
TAKE NOTICE, I, MatthewSandringham, do hereby certify that a copy of this document and
the contents thereof has, on June 24th, 2024, been served upon the opposing parties of the
above-entitled matter and all proceedings within.
June 24, 2024 So serviced,
MatthewSandringham
Counsel of Record
Clarke, Feelings & Associates, LLP.
Associate Attorney
R. Bar. No. 16103
Attorney for Plaintiff
LAW OFFICES OF CLARKE, FEELINGS & ASSOCIATES, LLP.
- 4 -
