Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04905/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04905-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 446
Nature of Suit: Americans with Disabilities Act - Other
Cause of Action: 42:12101 Americans w/ Disabilities Act (ADA)

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

 See Wade v. Chao, No. 06-cv-5431-MJJ (N.D. Cal. filed Sept. 5, 2006); Wade v.

Veterans Affairs N. Cal. Healthcare Sys., No. 06-cv-4905-CRB (N.D. Cal. filed Aug. 15, 2006);

Wade v. Chao, No. 06-cv-4829-MJJ (N.D. Cal. filed Aug. 10, 2006); Wade v. United States, No.

06-cv-4828-CRB (N.D. Cal. filed Aug. 10, 2006); Wade v. Am. Fed. of Gov’t Employees, No.

06-cv-4751-MEJ (N.D. Cal. filed Aug. 7, 2006); Wade v. United States, No. 06-cv-4726-MJJ

(N.D. Cal. filed Aug. 4, 2006); Wade v. Chao, No. 06-cv-4725-MJJ (N.D. Cal. filed Aug. 4,

2006); Wade v. United States, No. 06-cv-4704-WHA (N.D. Cal. filed Aug. 3, 2006); Wade v.

United States, No. 06-cv-4593-CRB (N.D. Cal. filed July 28, 2006); Wade v. Lockyer, No. 06-

cv-4431-MHP (N.D. Cal. filed July 20, 2006); Wade v. Chao, No. 06-cv-5431-MJJ (N.D. Cal.

filed Sept. 5, 2006); Wade v. Veterans Affairs N. Cal. Healthcare Sys., No. 06-cv-2925-CRB

(N.D. Cal. filed May 1, 2006); Wade v. Chao, No. 06-cv-2610-MJJ (N.D. Cal. filed Apr. 18,

2006); Wade v. Soc. Sec. Admin., No. 06-cv-2596-SBA (N.D. Cal. filed Apr. 17, 2006); Wade

v. Chao, No. 06-cv-2592-MJJ (N.D. Cal. filed Apr. 17, 2006); Wade v. United States, No. 06-cv2346-CRB (N.D. Cal. filed Apr. 4, 2006); Wade v. Chao, No. 06-cv-2209-MJJ (N.D. Cal. filed

Mar. 28, 2006); Wade v. Veterans Affairs N. Cal. Healthcare Sys., No. 06-cv-1963-CRB (N.D.

Cal. filed Mar. 15, 2006); Wade v. Chao, No. 06-cv-0710-MJJ (N.D. Cal. filed Feb. 1, 2006);

Wade v. Chao, No. 06-cv-0693-MJJ (N.D. Cal. filed Jan. 31, 2006); Wade v. Gonzales, No. 06-

cv-0399-PJH (N.D. Cal. filed Jan. 20, 2006); Wade v. Veterans Affairs N. Cal. Healthcare Sys., No. 05-cv-5361-CRB (N.D. Cal. filed Dec. 27, 2005); Wade v. Chao, No. 05-cv-5087-MJJ

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

E.K. WADE,

Plaintiff,

 v.

VETERANS AFFAIRS NORTHERN

CALIFORNIA HEALTHCARE SYSTEM,

Defendant. /

No. C 06-04905 CRB

ORDER RE: MOTION TO DISMISS

Since December of 2005, E.K. Wade has filed twenty-four lawsuits in the Northern

District of California.1

 Eight of these lawsuits relate to problems he has experienced at

Case 3:06-cv-04905-CRB Document 26 Filed 05/11/07 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

(N.D. Cal. filed Dec. 9, 2005); Wade v. Soc. Sec. Admin., No. 05-cv-5086-SBA (N.D. Cal. filed

Dec. 9, 2005); Wade v. Veterans Affairs N. Cal. Healthcare Sys., No. 05-cv-4960-CRB (N.D.

Cal. filed Dec. 1, 2005).

2

Veterans Administration hospitals in Martinez and Walnut Creek, California. These eight

lawsuits variously relate to three discrete episodes: (1) an incident in May of 2005 when

Wade received a prescription for a drug called Prednisone that apparently caused him

internal bleeding; (2) an incident in December of 2005 when the VA hospital in Walnut

Creek refused to provide him with mental health care services, ostensibly because Wade was

covered under both a VA health care plan and a private health care plan; or (3) another

incident in December of 2005 when the VA hospital in Walnut Creek refused to fill a

prescription for Prednisone for him. These eight “hospital cases” were related for collective

consideration by this Court.

This Court has previously dismissed three of the cases (Case Nos. 05-4960, 05-5361,

and 06-1963) on the basis that Wade failed to exhaust the administrative remedies available

to him through the Veterans Administration. The Court previously dismissed two cases

(Case Nos. 06-2925 and 06-4828) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. In those cases, the

Court found that the federal government was immune from Wade’s attempt to recover

damages based on alleged violations of federal law. The Court noted that the only basis for a

suit seeking damages against the Veterans Administration was the Federal Tort Claims Act,

and that Wade had failed to identify any state-law basis for his claims. 

Now pending before the Court is a motion to dismiss this action, Case No. 06-4905. 

This lawsuit, too, seeks damages against the federal government for alleged violations of

federal law. See Am. Compl. ¶ 10 (asserting a cause of action for the alleged violation of 38

C.F.R. § 17.38(a)(1)(i-iv)); id. ¶ 11 (asserting a cause of action for the alleged violation of 42

U.S.C. § 12132). For the reasons stated in the Court’s previous order, the Court lacks

jurisdiction to adjudicate such claims. F.D.I.C. v. Meyer, 510 U.S. 471, 475 (1994); 

//

//

Case 3:06-cv-04905-CRB Document 26 Filed 05/11/07 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

G:\CRBALL\2006\4905\order1.wpd 3

Love v. United States, 60 F.3d 642, 644 (9th Cir. 1995). Accordingly, the government’s

motion to dismiss is GRANTED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 11, 2007 

CHARLES R. BREYER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-04905-CRB Document 26 Filed 05/11/07 Page 3 of 3