Judge: Stephen I. Goorvitch, Case: 23STCV22019, Date: 2023-10-31 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV22019    Hearing Date: October 31, 2023    Dept: 39

Dewey Demetro, Jr. v. R. Ebe, et al.

Case No. 23STCV22019

Minute Order

Notice: The Court posts this tentative order in advance of the hearing on October 31, 2023, at 8:30 a.m.  The Court provides notice: If Plaintiff does not appear at the hearing, either remotely or in-person, he shall waive the right to be heard and shall submit to entry of this order.  If Plaintiff wishes to appear remotely but is experiencing difficulty, he may contact the Court’s clerk, Roberto Mendoza, at (213) 633-0159 for assistance. 

            Plaintiff Dewey Demetro, Jr. (“Plaintiff”), a self-represented party, filed a handwritten complaint with no causes of action against two security guards at the Spring Street Courthouse.  The first is “R. Ebe.”  The second is unknown to Plaintiff, so he is named as “Gay Security Guard.”  In his complaint, he writes: “A sireal [sic] killer is killing 10 to 15 people a month!”  However, the gravamen of Plaintiff’s complaint relates to the security protocols of the Spring Street Courthouse.  Plaintiff alleges that he had a court appearance in Department #32 on September 13, 2023, at 8:30 a.m.  Plaintiff alleges that a security guard made him check-in, show his identification, and remove his belt.  Plaintiff alleges that the security guard would not allow him to enter the courthouse.  As a result, Plaintiff alleges: “Two years of work and the killer gose [sic] free!  The worlds [sic] biggest sireal [sic] killer is set free to kill some more because of the R. Ebe [and] gay the security guard of the Spring Street Courthouse.”  Plaintiff seeks “Eight Billion Dollars.”  The complaint alleges no other facts and asserts no causes of action.

            This complaint is meritless on its face, not only based upon the nature of the allegations, but also because it asserts no causes of action.  Further, this Court has no jurisdiction over this dispute.  The Spring Street Courthouse is federal property; the U.S. General Services Administration controls access to the building; and the security guards are hired by the federal government.  The United States and its agencies enjoy sovereign immunity from civil actions in state courts, per the Supremacy Clause, absent consent or waiver.  (See United States ex rel. Touhy v. Ragen (1951) 340 U.S. 462, 464.)  Rather, this action must be filed in federal court after complying with all applicable prerequisites.

The Court has inherent authority to dismiss cases that are patently frivolous.  (See Huang v. Hanks (2018) 23 Cal.App.5th 179, 181-182, citations omitted).  The Court also may notice its own motion for judgment on the pleadings, per Code of Civil Procedure section 438(b)(2).  Based upon the foregoing authorities, the Court issues an Order to Show Cause why this case should not be dismissed and notices its own motion for judgment on the pleadings.  The hearing shall be held on October 20, 2023, at 8:30 a.m. at the following location:

            Stanley Mosk Courthouse

            111 North Hill Street

            Department #39 (Goorvitch, J.)

            Los Angeles, California 90012

The Court authorizes both in-person and remote appearances.  If Plaintiff would like to appear remotely but is having difficulty doing so, he may contact the Court’s clerk, Roberto Mendoza, at (213) 633-0159 for assistance. 

            Plaintiff may file a written opposition on or before October 9, 2023, or he may address the issues orally at the hearing.  The Court provides notice: If Plaintiff does not demonstrate that this action is viable, absent good cause, the Court will dismiss this case with prejudice at the upcoming hearing.  Similarly, if Plaintiff does not appear at the hearing, absent good cause, the Court will dismiss this case with prejudice.

            The Court’s clerk shall serve this order upon Plaintiff.