Baxter v. Betty C. Bortin

Background

Richard G. Baxter alleged that Vicki Hennessy, while serving as Sheriff of San Francisco, allowed Betty C. Bortin and Sandra Schwartz to embezzle money from the San Francisco Sheriff’s Department Inmate Welfare Fund. He alleged that the money financed Hennessy’s campaign for sheriff and that Bortin used money to pay her taxes. Baxter also alleged that he had been married to Bortin and that she refinanced his mortgage without his permission, causing him to pay a 30-year mortgage twice. He believed the allegedly embezzled funds should have been used to improve conditions in the San Francisco County Jails.

Jurisdiction and Standing

The court explained that standing requires a plaintiff to show a concrete and particularized injury that is actual or imminent, a connection between that injury and the challenged conduct, and a likelihood that a favorable decision would remedy the injury. A generalized concern that the law was not properly applied is not enough. The court held that Baxter lacked standing to bring the embezzlement claims against Hennessy, Bortin, and Schwartz because he alleged no actual, concrete injury. Because a plaintiff without standing does not invoke federal jurisdiction, the court dismissed those claims.

The court separately held that Baxter’s mortgage-refinancing allegation was not a cognizable federal claim. Baxter identified no federal law or federal right that would provide federal jurisdiction over that allegation. The court dismissed that claim without prejudice to Baxter pursuing it in state court.

Disposition

The court dismissed the federal action, granted Baxter’s application to proceed without paying filing fees, directed the Clerk to terminate pending motions, entered judgment in favor of the defendants, and closed the file.