Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Mecey v. City of Farmington

United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division

November 30, 2017

ROBIN MECEY and DAVID MECEY, Plaintiffs,
v.
CITY OF FARMINGTON, et al., Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          Jean C. Hamilton UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         Before the Court is Defendant Edward Pultz's Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative, For More Definite Statement and To Strike Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint. (ECF 27). The matter is fully briefed and ready for disposition.

         FACTUAL BAGROUND

         Plaintiffs Robin Mecey and David Mecey filed their pro se Complaint on June 12, 2017. (ECF 1). Defendant J.C. Penny Corporation, Inc., (J.C. Penny) and Defendant Victoria Bollman (Bollman) each filed a Motion to Dismiss, For More Definite Statement and/or to Strike (ECF 10; ECF 17) and Defendant Edward Pultz (Judge Pultz) filed a Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative, for More Definite Statement and to Strike (ECF 18).

         Prior to ruling on the aforementioned Motions, the Court granted Plaintiffs leave to file an amended complaint. (ECF 22). On September 1, 2017, Plaintiffs filed a First Amended Complaint. (ECF 23). As relevant to the Motion under consideration, in its first paragraph, titled “Jurisdictional Statement, ” the fourteen page First Amended Complaint states that Plaintiffs are bringing their claims against “a municipality, it's [sic] officers and individuals acting under color of law” and that they are challenging “the constitutionality of their acts.” (ECF 23, ¶ 1). In its fourth paragraph, the First Amended Complaint states that “[a]t all times, ” Judge Pultz was acting as a State official, as he was “employed, compensated, enriched and rewarded by the state, ” and that he was being sued in his official capacity and in his individual capacity. (ECF 23, ¶ 4).

         In a fifth paragraph, titled “Nature of the Case, ” Plaintiffs state that Loss Prevention Agent Summer Taylor was sent to the J.C. Penny store in Farmington, Missouri, where Robin Mecey worked, and that Taylor was to investigate alleged shortages in cash registers throughout the store. This paragraph further states that “Robin Mecey was singled out with no probable cause, ” “lured into the back room of the store under false pretenses, ” and “held against her will for over 2 hour[s] being forced to write a confession for the loss prevention agent concerning events she knew nothing about as a condition of her release.” The fifth paragraph also states that Robin Mecey “witnessed the [loss prevention agent] and her coworker fabricate evidence to make up their story.” (ECF 23, ¶ 5).

         In a sixth paragraph, under a heading titled “Causes of [A]ction, ” Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint states that, on March 24, 2014, after Robin Mecey “was lured from her work station under false pretenses into a back room of the store . . . where loss prevention agent Summer Taylor . . . was waiting, Robin Mecey was then held and terrorized for over 2 hours . . . against her will.” This paragraph continues to state Robin Mecey “was then forced to participate . . . in falsifying evidence, fabricating a story, falsifying amounts of shortages and making up circumstances to write on the confession, in order for [] Taylor . . . ‘to close th[e] investigation so she could get home'”; that “Robin Mecey was then coerced into writing and signing [a] fabricated confession as a promise and condition of her release”; and that “Robin Mecey was never accused or suspected of having anything on her person or within her belongings that belonged to [] J.C. Penny [] before or during the detention to justify the restraint.” (ECF 23, ¶ 6).

         In the seventh paragraph of the First Amended Complaint, Plaintiffs state that, on March 24, 2014, Robin Mecey was released to the custody of the Farmington Police Department; that she was charged with misdemeanors, “without a warrant, without probable cause, without exigent circumstances that involved her and without any recovered items that belonged to J.C. Penny upon her person or within her possessions”; and that she was imprisoned “at the St. Francois County Jail in violation of [the] 4th, 5th and 14th Amendments.” (ECF 23, ¶ 7).

         Further, as relevant to the Motion under consideration, in paragraph eleven, Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint states that the “City of Farmington has a conflict of interest and unfair practices in their Judicial process, ” and that Robin Mecey was accused, prosecuted, tried, and had to attempt her appeal all thru one person.” (ECF 23, ¶ 11).

         Paragraph twelve of the First Amended Complaint describes what allegedly took place during her July 24, 2014 trial and states:

To illustrate the judicial atmosphere in the court room of Judge Edward Pultz at the Farmington municipal court, municipal court Clerk Susie Miller was allowed by Judge Pultz to raise her hands above her head with her hands claps together moving side to side and cheer out loud “Yeah” as if she was at a boxing match as the judge introduces the city prosecutor Kevin Karraker to the room of defendants. It was also noted and witnessed that before Robin Mecey's trial . . . that [the] prosecutor [ ] spoke out loud to officer Ryan Miller just before trial asking him what he knew of the next case? Had he spoken with defendant Robin Mecey? Officer Ryan openly admitted that he had never spoke to Robin Mecey at all about the events that happened at J.C. Penney on 03/24/2014 and only knew what LPA Summer Taylor had told him. It was then witness [sic] that [the] prosecutor [ ] while rolling his eyes upward making an extreme facial expression replied that's really ashame [sic]. Office[r] Ryan Miller went on to testify afterward that Robin Mecey made an excited utterance in the car on the 5 minute trip to the jail, this remark was the only thing Robin Mecey was found guilty on beside one other perjured statement . . . that made no sense. In State v. Eaton (Mo.), 280 S.W.2d 63, this act alone is a violation of Robin Mecey's right to 5th and 14th amendment due process, that individual was convicted by perjured testimony knowingly procured by the prosecution, stated facts showing denial of due process.

(ECF 23, ¶ 12).

         Paragraph thirteen states as follows:

07/24/2014 Farmington Municipal Court Judge Edward Pultz is accused of acting with no jurisdiction in a trial on 07/24/2014 acting on case numbers 7392, 7393, 7394, a. Overruling all of Robin's Mecey's objections to faulty informations, faulty affidavit and objections citing an active arbitration agreement which excluded court proceedings.
b. All discovery request made by Robin Mecey were denied as Judge Pultz simply ignored J.C. Penney's non compliance with subpoena's and summonses. J.C. Penney refused in writing to make Summer Taylor available nor would they comply with the subpoenas and all request for records.
c. Furthermore Robin Mecey was denied counsel during the trial and denied her notes and records while trying to defend pro se.
d. Pro se Robin Mecey was denied her notes during testimony, while Officer Ryan was allowed to testify by reading his notes. Prosecution wittiness [sic] Marie Jirik was allowed to read Robin Mecey's affidavit on the events of 03/24/2014 moments before she testified when in an act of bad faith the prosecutor who was given a copy of the document in good faith upon a motion to enter, rushed over and gave his copy to Marie Jirik to read moments before she testified.
e. Despite Robin Mecey denying the charges and the fact that no missing money had been reported and that the 2 people testifying against Robin Mecey had no first had knowledge of any of the alleged events Robin Mecey was being accused of she was found guilty on all charges.
f. The evidence consisting of Ryan Miller[']s testimony of excited utterance something he failed to mention on any of his reports and he had openly denied and upon the testimony of Marie Jirik who testified she had not work any of the days in question but ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.