Ratzlaff v. USPS ( 2023 )

1 PHILLIP A. TALBERT United States Attorney 2 VICTORIA L. BOESCH Assistant United States Attorney 3 501 I Street, Suite 10-100 Sacramento, CA 95814 4 Telephone: (916) 554-2700 5 6 Attorneys for the United States 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 LISA RATZLAFF, ) Case No. 2:21-cv-01631-JAM-KJN ) 11 Plaintiff, ) STIPULATION AND ORDER TO ) DISMISS CLAIMS AND GRANT 12 v. ) LEAVE TO FILE FIRST AMENDED ) COMPLAINT 13 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) 14 ) Defendants. ) DISTRICT JUDGE JOHN A. MENDEZ 15 ) ) 16 17 Plaintiff Lisa Ratzlaff and Defendant the United States respectfully submit this stipulation to 18 resolve issues that the United States would otherwise raise in a motion to dismiss. Plaintiff’s lawsuit 19 was originally filed in Placer County Superior Court against the United States Postal Service and 20 Kayla Joy Dryden. Dkt. 1 at 4-8. The United States removed the case to this Court, substituting the 21 United States as Defendant in place of Kayla Joy Dryden. Dkt. 1 at 1-2; Dkt. 1-1; Dkt. 1-2. The case 22 is therefore currently pending against defendants the United States and the United States Postal 23 Service. 24 The United States is the only permissible defendant in a Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) 25 case. Because the FTCA allows only claims against the United States, the parties agree to dismiss the 26 United States Postal Service as a defendant. See Kennedy v. U.S. Postal Serv., 145 F.3d 1077, 1078 27 (9th Cir. 1998) (affirming dismissal of an FTCA claim against USPS because “the United States is 28 1 the only proper party defendant in an FTCA action”). 2 The First Cause of Action in Plaintiff’s complaint (Dkt. 1 at 6-7) seeks to bring a claim under 3 California Government Code § 815.2. The United States intended to bring a motion to dismiss this 4 claim because California Government Code section 815.2 does not apply against the United States 5 under the FTCA. The FTCA renders the United States liable “in the same manner and to the same 6 extent as a private individual under like circumstances.” 28 U.S.C. § 2674. State laws that apply to 7 public entities (like California Gov Code section 815.2) therefore do not apply to the United States 8 under the FTCA. See United States v. Olson, 546 U.S. 43 (2005) (holding that the FTCA waives the 9 federal government's sovereign immunity only where local law would make a private person liable in 10 tort, not where local law would make a state or municipal entity liable). To avoid unnecessary 11 motion practice, the parties agree to amend the First Cause of Action in the complaint. 12 The Second Cause of Action in Plaintiff’s complaint (Dkt. 1 at 7-8) seeks to bring a claim for 13 negligent hiring, supervision, or retention of employee Kayla Joy Dryden. The United States 14 intended to bring a motion to dismiss this claim because this negligent hiring, supervision, or 15 retention claim is barred by the FTCA’s Discretionary Function Exception. See Heidari-Mojaz v. 16 Arreguin, No. CV 20-154-CBM-SHK(X), 2020 WL 6541991, at *3 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 18, 2020) 17 (dismissing negligent hiring, supervision, or retention claim brought under the FTCA because “[t]he 18 Ninth Circuit has held claims against the federal government challenging the negligent hiring, 19 employment, supervision and training of employees ‘fall squarely within the discretionary function 20 exception’ to the FTCA and are ‘barred.’”). To avoid unnecessary motion practice, the parties agree 21 to dismiss the Second Cause of Action in the complaint. 22 The parties agree that Plaintiff will file a First Amended Complaint asserting a negligence 23 claim against the United States only under the FTCA based on alleged negligence by Kayla Joy 24 Dryden in operating a United States Postal Service vehicle on or about May 23, 2018. The parties 25 further agree that the United States will have 21 days from the filing of the First Amended Complaint 26 to file a response. 27 /// 28 1 The parties respectfully request that the Court approve this stipulation. 2 3 Respectfully submitted, 4 Dated: January 9, 2023 PHILLIP A. TALBERT 5 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 6 By: /s/ Victoria L. Boesch 7 VICTORIA L. BOESCH Assistant United States Attorney 8 Attorneys for the United States 9 Dated: January 6, 2023 DEL RIO & CARAWAY, P.C. 10 11 Charles D. Caraway (authorized 1/6/2023) Charles D. Caraway 12 Attorneys for Plaintiff 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 15 Dated: January 9, 2023 /s/ John A. Mendez 16 THE HONORABLE JOHN A. MENDEZ SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28