From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Trzaska v. Town & Country Two

Supreme Court of Nevada.
Sep 15, 2011
373 P.3d 968 (Nev. 2011)

Opinion

No. 57366.

09-15-2011

Edward Seth TRZASKA, Appellant, v. TOWN & COUNTRY TWO ; Ed Zimmerman ; and Davita Zimmerman, Respondents.

Edward Seth Trzaska Robert P. Bettinger


Edward Seth Trzaska

Robert P. Bettinger

ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

This is a proper person appeal from a district court order dismissing appellant's complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief and for damages based on alleged civil rights violations. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Valerie Adair, Judge.

We have reviewed the record and considered appellant's civil proper person appeal statement, and we conclude that dismissal was appropriate. Buzz Stew, LLC v. City of N. Las Vegas, 124 Nev. 224, 227–28, 181 P.3d 670, 672 (2008) (stating that this court reviews all legal conclusions in NRCP 12(b)(5) motions to dismiss de novo, accepting all factual allegations in the complaint as true and drawing all inferences in the plaintiffs favor). Appellant's complaint asserts claims against respondents based upon actions taken by members of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department. Appellant has not, however, pleaded sufficient facts to demonstrate the necessary elements of a claim for relief against respondents. NRCP 12(b)(5) ; see Adickes v. Kress & Co., 398 U.S. 144, 150–52 (1970) (stating elements necessary for a 42 USC § 1983 civil rights action against a private party); Butler v. Goldblatt Bros., Inc., 589 F.2d 323, 326 (7th Cir.1978) (noting that a defendant's act of supplying information to the police, who then acted on their own initiative in arresting plaintiff, was not actionable under § 1983 ); Western States Constr. v. Michoff, 108 Nev. 931, 936, 840 P.2d 1220, 1223 (1992) (explaining that a complaint must at least “set forth sufficient facts to demonstrate the necessary elements of a claim for relief so that the defending party has adequate notice of the nature of the claim and relief sought”).

Accordingly, we conclude that the district court did not err in dismissing the underlying action, and we

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Trzaska v. Town & Country Two

Supreme Court of Nevada.
Sep 15, 2011
373 P.3d 968 (Nev. 2011)
Case details for

Trzaska v. Town & Country Two

Case Details

Full title:Edward Seth TRZASKA, Appellant, v. TOWN & COUNTRY TWO ; Ed Zimmerman ; and…

Court:Supreme Court of Nevada.

Date published: Sep 15, 2011

Citations

373 P.3d 968 (Nev. 2011)