2006-01-25_Dan_Cole_v._County_of_Hawaii_-_Order_Granting_Defendants_Motions_to_Dismiss

Home

Case 1:05-cv-00325-JMS-BMK Document 35 Filed 01/25/2006 Page 2 of 24 which relief can be granted. Therefore, the court GRANTS the Defendants' motions to dismiss Cole's Second Amended Complaint with prejudice. II. BACKGROUND Cole alleges that, in 2001, a contractor dumped petroleum- contaminated rocks and soil on his property. He contends that this contractor had a contract with the County to remove flood debris from Hilo streams, and that he had entered into an agreement with the contractor to deliver some of this flood debris to his property. According to Cole, however, the flood debris to be delivered to his property was supposed to be "inert fill material," when in fact the contractor delivered petroleum-contaminated materials. Cole alleges that the State and County are responsible for the damage to his property and have violated his constitutional rights in failing to remedy the situation. On May 17, 2005, Cole filed his Complaint against the State and County. The County and State filed separate motions to dismiss on June 7 and 13, 2005, respectively. Cole filed responses to these motions on June 15 and June 21, respectively. On June 17, 2005 (i.e., after the County and the State filed their motions to dismiss), Cole filed an Amended Complaint without leave of court. The County filed a motion to strike or dismiss Cole's Amended Complaint on June 2