Redeaux v. Wise
- Edward Chen
- 3:24-cv-01979
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Redeaux v. Wise, Judge Chen dismissed the amended complaint with prejudice after screening, entered final judgment, and closed the case.
The dismissal with prejudice affected Mary Ann Redeaux and the other plaintiffs; the court ordered final judgment and closure of the case involving Noel Wise and the other defendants.
What happened
In Redeaux v. Wise, Mary Ann Redeaux and other plaintiffs filed an amended complaint after the court had dismissed their original complaint but allowed them to amend. The court reviewed the amended pleading under the statute governing screening of complaints by people proceeding without paying filing fees.
The court said the amended complaint did not correct the problems identified in its earlier order. The plaintiffs also argued that the court lacked authority because they had not consented to a “lesser judge,” but the court rejected that argument and stated that it had federal-question and supplemental jurisdiction.
Judge Edward Chen dismissed the amended complaint with prejudice, ordered the Clerk to enter final judgment, and directed the Clerk to close the case.
The detailed version
- Redeaux v. Wise · No. 3:24-cv-01979
- Edward Chen
- Apr. 22, 2024
Background
The court had previously granted the plaintiffs’ application to proceed without paying the filing fee and dismissed their original complaint with permission to amend. The plaintiffs timely filed an amended complaint. The court again reviewed the pleading under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), which requires screening in this context.
Court’s analysis
The court found that although the plaintiffs made some changes, the amended complaint did not address the deficiencies identified in the prior order. The plaintiffs also appeared to argue that the court lacked authority to decide the case because they had not consented to a “lesser judge.” The court rejected that argument and stated that it had subject-matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1367(a). Section 1331 provides federal-question jurisdiction, while § 1367(a) permits related state-law claims to be heard alongside claims within the court’s original jurisdiction.
The opinion text also discusses the standard for judicial recusal, including that a judge’s prior adverse ruling is not, by itself, enough to require recusal. The provided text does not set out additional factual details about the plaintiffs’ underlying claims.
Disposition
The court dismissed the amended complaint with prejudice. It instructed the Clerk to enter a final judgment and close the file. Because the dismissal followed statutory screening and the court did not decide the underlying legal claims, this is a procedural ruling.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.