Penny Gardner, formerly known as Penny Rodriguez, filed a lawsuit in federal court against the State of Washington, eight state agencies, and an individual defendant named Israel Rodriguez. Gardner alleged violations of her federal and state constitutional rights, including due process and equal protection, under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985(3), and 1986, as well as various state law claims. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the state defendants, dismissing the federal claims and remanding the state law claims against the individual defendant to state court. Gardner appealed the dismissal of her federal claims, while Rodriguez cross-appealed the remand of his state law claims.
The Ninth Circuit addressed three primary issues. First, the court held that the State of Washington and its agencies are not "persons" within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Relying on Supreme Court precedent in *Will v. Michigan Dep't of State Police*, the court explained that the plain text of the statute creates a cause of action against "every person," which does not include states. The court rejected Gardner's argument that the state's removal of the case to federal court waived its status as a non-person. The panel clarified that Eleventh Amendment immunity and Section 1983 personhood are distinct concepts; waiving one does not waive the other. Furthermore, the court noted that Washington state law does not modify this federal requirement. Second, the court reviewed the district court's decision to retain supplemental jurisdiction over Gardner's state law outrage claim against the state defendants. The panel found no abuse of discretion, citing judicial economy because the case had been pending for nearly 22 months and the claim had been fully briefed. The court also affirmed the dismissal of this claim on the merits, noting Gardner failed to prove the state defendants engaged in conduct "so extreme in degree[] as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency." Third, the court affirmed the remand of state law claims against the individual defendant, Rodriguez. The panel reasoned that judicial economy concerns did not apply to Rodriguez once the state defendants were dismissed, as he was the sole remaining defendant facing only state law claims.
Gardner's federal civil rights claims against the State of Washington and its agencies are permanently dismissed. The state law claims against the state defendants remain resolved on the merits, while the state law claims against the individual defendant, Israel Rodriguez, must now proceed in state court. This decision reinforces the strict statutory limitation that states cannot be sued for damages under Section 1983, regardless of procedural waivers.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download