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.

Dimitri v. City of Philadelphia

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

October 16, 2019

VIRGINIA R. DIMITRI, ET AL., Plaintiffs
v.
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, ET AL., Defendants

          MEMORANDUM

          John Milton Younge Judge

         Before the Court is Defendants'-City of Philadelphia (“City”) and City of Philadelphia Police Department (“PPD”) (collectively, “Defendants”)-Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (Dkt. 2). The Court finds this matter appropriate for resolution without oral argument. Fed.R.Civ.P. 78; L.R. 7.1(f). For the reasons that follow, Defendants' Motion will be granted.

         I. BACKGROUND

         A. Facts [1]

         Plaintiff, Virginia R. Dimitri, individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of Daniel J. Dimitri (hereinafter, “Plaintiffs”), brings this action against Defendants in connection with the tragic death of her son, Daniel J. Dimitri. Compl. ¶ 1. On January 31, 2017, Daniel J. Dimitri was crossing the street in Philadelphia when he was struck and killed by a motor vehicle operated by Adam Soto “who, at that time, was an off-duty police officer.” Id. ¶ 4. It is alleged that at the time of the accident, Adam Soto was drag-racing at an excessive speed against a fellow off-duty police officer, Anthony Forest. Id. ¶¶ 5-7, 21. At the time of the accident, both Adam Soto and Anthony Forest were employed as police officers with the City of Philadelphia Police Department. Id. ¶ 8. Therefore, Plaintiffs maintain that Defendants were responsible at all times for the monitoring of Officers Soto and Forest. Id. ¶ 9.

         Plaintiffs assert that Defendants knew, or should have known at the time of the accident, that Officers Soto and Forest both had substance abuse issues, as well as the “propensit[y] to operate vehicles at excessive speeds and/or drag race[.]” Id. ¶¶ 13-14, 22. Plaintiffs further assert that Defendants had a documented substance abuse policy, yet failed to implement it against Officers Soto and Forest, and such failure to follow internal policies was the proximate cause of Daniel J. Dimitri's death. Id. ¶¶ 12, 15-16. Plaintiffs also allege that Defendants were aware that Officers Soto and Forest had both been previously reprimanded for operating their vehicles at excessive speeds/careless driving, and yet disregarded a documented policy requiring Defendants to remove the driving privileges of employees with moving violations. Id. ¶¶ 24-26. Consequently, Plaintiffs allege that “Defendants individually and/or collectively caused the death of” Daniel J. Dimitri. Id. ¶ 27.

         Based on this course of events, Plaintiffs assert six claims for relief:

COUNT 1: 42 U.S.C. § 1983, asserted against Defendant City
COUNT 2: 42 U.S.C. § 1983, asserted against Defendant PPD
COUNT 3: 42 U.S.C. § 8542, asserted against Defendant City
COUNT 4: 42 U.S.C. § 8542, asserted against Defendant PPD
COUNT 5: Wrongful Death, asserted against Defendants City and PPD
COUNT 6: Survival Action, asserted against Defendants City and PPD

See generally id. at 17-21. Plaintiffs request general damages, delay damages, costs of suit, and such other relief as the Court deems just and equitable. Id.

         B. ...


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.