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.

Wickenkamp v. Hampton

United States District Court, D. Oregon

February 24, 2014

MARY WICKENKAMP, Plaintiff,
v.
BRUCE HAMPTON, VENESE HAMPTON, SCOTT HAMPTON, D. RAHN HOSTETTER, D. ZACHARY HOSTETTER, REBECCA A. KNAPP, JOHN Doe No. 1, and JOHN DOE, No. 2, Defendants.

MARY WICKENKAMP, Victoria, TX, Plaintiff, Pro Se.

SCOTT HAMPTON, Joseph, OR, Defendant, Pro Se.

THOMAS C. PEACHEY, The Dalles, OR, Attorney for Defendants D. Rahn Hostetter, D. Zachary, Hostetter, and Rebecca J. Knapp.

OPINION AND ORDER

ANNA J. BROWN, District Judge.

This matter comes before the Court on the Motion (#35) to Dismiss Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b) (5) of Defendants D. Rahn Hostetter, D. Zachary Hostetter, and Rebecca J. Knapp and the Motion (#44) to Dismiss of Defendant Scott Hampton. For the reasons that follow, the Court GRANTS Defendants' Motions and DISMISSES without prejudice Plaintiff's claims against Rahn Hostetter, Zachary Hostetter, Knapp, and Hampton.

BACKGROUND

On January 28, 2013, Plaintiff Mary Wickenkamp filed a pro se Complaint in this Court in which she alleged claims against Defendants for violation of the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), 18 U.S.C. §§ 1962(c) and 1964(c); intentional infliction of emotional distress; slander by false light and defamation; violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2511 and 2520; and violation of Oregon's Unfair Trade Practices Act (UTPA), Oregon Revised Statute§§ 646.607 and 646.638.

On January 30, 2013, the Court issued an Opinion and Order in which it granted Plaintiff's Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, but dismissed Plaintiff's Complaint with leave to file an amended complaint curing the deficiencies set out in the Court's Opinion and Order.

On March 19, 2013, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint asserting claims against Defendants for violation of RICO, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1962(c) and 1964(c); violation of Oregon's Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (ORICO), Oregon Revised Statutes§§ 166.720 and 166.725; intentional infliction of emotional distress; slander by false light and defamation; violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2511; and violation of the UTPA, Oregon Revised Statute§§ 646.607 and 646.638.

The Court granted Plaintiff several extensions of time to file proofs of service. On July 30, 2013, the Court entered an Order requiring Plaintiff to file proofs of service and a status report as to service no later than September 30, 2013.

On September 23, 2013, three Summons and copies of Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint addressed to D. Rahn Hostetter, D. Zachary Hostetter, and Rebecca A. [ sic ] Knapp were delivered via certified mail to the offices of the Hostetter Law Group LLP and the Knapp Law Office in Enterprise, Oregon. The certified mailings for D. Rahn Hostetter and D. Zachary Hostetter were signed for by legal assistant Tami Phinney. The certified mailing for Rebecca Knapp was signed for by legal assistant Marilyn Harman. Defendants Rahn Hostetter, Zachary Hostetter, and Knapp testify in their Declarations that they have never received any Summons or copies of Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint via first-class mail at their dwellings, usual places of abode, or regular places of business.

Also on September 23, 2013, Scott Hampton signed for a certified mailing of the Summons and Amended Complaint at the Joseph, Oregon, post office. Hampton states in his Declaration that he never received any Summons or copies of Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint via first-class mail.

On October 14, 2013, Rahn Hostetter, Zachary Hostetter, and Knapp filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's claims against them for insufficient service of process.

On October 15, 2013, Hampton filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's claims against them for ...


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.