Case 1:13-cv MSK-MJW Document 59 Filed 09/13/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 22 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
|
|
- Norah Perry
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Case 1:13-cv MSK-MJW Document 59 Filed 09/13/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 22 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 13-cv MSK - MJW JOHN DOE, JANE DOE, Y.C. by her parents and next friends, E.C. by her parents and next friends, E.S.C. by his parents and next friends, and J.C. by his parents and next friends, Plaintiffs, v. JOANNA MCAFEE, El Paso County Department of Human Services intake caseworker, individually, and as an agent, employee, and representative of El Paso County, KATHY TREMAINE, El Paso County Department of Human Services caseworker, individually, and as an agent, employee, and representative of El Paso County, PATSY HOOVER, El Paso County Department of Human Services supervisor, individually, and as an agent, employee, and representative of El Paso County, LISA LITTLE, SUPERVISOR OF THE DAY, El Paso County Department of Human Services supervisor, individually, and as an agent, employee, and representative of El Paso County, RICHARD BENGTSSON, Executive Director, El Paso County Department of Human Services, individually, and as an agent, employee, and representative of El Paso County, JEFF GREENE, County Administrator over El Paso County Department of Human Services, individually, and as an agent, employee, and representative of El Paso County, JOEY HARRIS, Officer, El Paso County Sheriff s Office, individually, and as an agent, employee, and representative of the El Paso County Sheriff s Office, JON PRICE, Officer, El Paso County Sheriff s Office, individually, and as an agent, employee, and representative of the El Paso County Sheriff s Office, BENJAMIN DEARMONT, Supervisor, El Paso County Sheriff s Office, individually, and as an agent, employee, and representative of the El Paso County Sheriff s Office, MITCHELL MIHALKO, Officer, El Paso County Sheriff s Office, individually, and as an agent, employee, and representative of the El Paso County Sheriff s Office, TERRY MAKETA, Sheriff of El Paso County, as an agent, employee, and representative of El Paso County,
2 Case 1:13-cv MSK-MJW Document 59 Filed 09/13/13 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 22 EL PASO COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, CHAD HAYNES, Investigator, 4 th Judicial District Attorney s Office, individually, and as an agent, employee, and representative of the 4 th Judicial District Attorney s Office, RANDY STEVENSON, Deputy Chief Investigator, 4 th Judicial District Attorney s Office, individually, and as an agent, employee, and representative of the 4 th Judicial District Attorney s Office, JONATHAN HUDSON, Officer, Monument Police Department, individually, and ANDREW ROMANO, Officer, Monument Police Department, individually, Defendants. COUNTY DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO FED.R.CIV.P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) COME NOW Defendants Joanna McAfee, Kathy Tremaine, Patsy Hoover, Lisa Little, Richard Bengtsson ( DHS Defendants ), Jeff Greene ( Defendant Greene ), Deputies Joey Harris, Jon Price, Benjamin Dearmont, Mitchell Mihalko, Terry Maketa ( EPSO Defendants ), El Paso County Board of County Commissioners ( BOCC Defendant ), Chad Haynes, Randy Stevenson ( DA Defendants ), (collectively County Defendants ), by and through the Office of the County Attorney of El Paso County, Colorado, who move to dismiss all of Plaintiff s claims against County Defendants pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) and (6). County Defendants certify that counsel extensively discussed via telephone the grounds for this motion and the relief requested with Plaintiffs counsel and counsel for the Town of Monument Defendants pursuant to D.C. Colo. L. Civ. 7.1(A) on June 13, County Defendants conferred again with 2
3 Case 1:13-cv MSK-MJW Document 59 Filed 09/13/13 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 22 Plaintiffs counsel with an detailing County Defendants grounds for dismissal during the conferral. Upon filing of the First Amended Complaint, County Defendants conferred again with Plaintiffs counsel via , and reiterated grounds for dismissal on July 2, 2013, then filed County Defendants Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) on July 26, 2013, to which Plaintiffs responded on August 5, 2013 and simultaneously filed the Second Amended Complaint 1. Plaintiffs counsel opposes the relief requested herein. CLAIMS The Third Amended Complaint ( TAC ) alleges Twelve Claims for Relief: Y.C. was allegedly subjected to an attempted illegal search 2 in violation of the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution and subjected to unconstitutional coercion 3 in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution; (ii) Y.C. s right to privacy, secured by the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, were violated by the attempted search; (iii) Y.C. was allegedly subjected to an unlawful seizure based on a Colorado District Court signed custody order and subsequent felony stop by the Colorado State Patrol; 1 The Third Amended Complaint became the operative complaint by Order of U.S. Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe on August 20, The First and Second Claims are both related to Defendants alleged attempts to conduct a strip search on April 19, The term attempted is used because TAC, 193, alleges that Y.C. refused to be subjected to a search. 3 This Coercive behavior is not alleged to have resulted in consent to the search. TAC, 193, 199, 200,
4 Case 1:13-cv MSK-MJW Document 59 Filed 09/13/13 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 22 (iv) John Doe alleges that his refusal to compel Y.C. to show DHS Defendants Y.C. s injuries was protected under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, and Defendants chilled his exercise of that right; (v) Jane Doe alleges that her refusal to compel Y.C. to show DHS Defendants Y.C. s injuries was protected under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, and Defendants chilled her exercise of that right; (vi) Jane Doe was allegedly subjected to an unlawful search and seizure based on a felony stop conducted by the Colorado State Patrol; (vii) John and Jane Doe allege that their liberty interests in care, custody and control of their children, and in familial association and privacy were violated by the application and issuance of the custody order, in violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution; (viii) E.C., E.S.C., and J.C. allege they were subjected to removal from the custody of their parents in violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution; (ix) E.C., E.S.C., and J.C. allege that DHS Defendants conducting an interview at their school resulted in an illegal seizure, in violation of the Fourth Amendment; (x) all Plaintiffs generally allege that their First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights and liberty interests were violated by the policies of 4
5 Case 1:13-cv MSK-MJW Document 59 Filed 09/13/13 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 22 DHS Defendants, Defendant Greene, BOCC Defendant, and EPSO Defendants; (xi) all Plaintiffs generally allege defendants failure to train and supervise their employees resulted in violation of the First, Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution; and (xii) County defendants instituted a retaliatory prosecution against John Doe by County Defendants, DHS Defendant McAfee, EPSO Defendant Mihalko and DA Defendants Haynes and Stevenson. ARGUMENT County Defendants incorporate their Eleventh Amendment Immunity arguments from their Brief in Support of their Motion to Dismiss ( Brief ) II. to all claims against DHS Defendants and DA Defendants. County Defendants further incorporate their qualified immunity arguments from their Brief III. to all claims against individual County Defendants. I. FIRST CLAIM: UNREASONABLE SEARCH AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL COERCION ALLEGED BY PLAINTIFF Y.C.AGAINST DHS AND EPSO DEFENDANTS A. Burden of Proof. 1. Rule 12(b)(6): A motion to dismiss is properly granted when a complaint provides no more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007). The inquiry is "whether the complaint contains 'enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.'" Ridge at Red Hawk, 5
6 Case 1:13-cv MSK-MJW Document 59 Filed 09/13/13 USDC Colorado Page 6 of 22 LLC v. Schneider, 493 F.3d 1174, 1177 (10th Cir. 2007) (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570). 2. Qualified Immunity: County Defendants raise the defense of qualified immunity. Once raised, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to demonstrate the two prongs. See, Brief III. B. Elements of Claims Asserted or Potentially Asserted in First Claim. 1. Elements of claim of Fourth Amendment unconstitutional search. In order to establish the elements of a Fourth Amendment claim, Plaintiff must plausibly allege: (1) an objectively unreasonable search or seizure 4 ; which (2) took place under color of law; and (3) through means intentionally applied 5. Personal participation is an essential element of this 42 U.S.C claim. See, Brief I. 2. Elements of Claim of Fourteenth Amendment Substantive Due Process Violation. Y.C. s substantive due process claim is raised in the context of an alleged Fourth Amendment violation. Where a particular Amendment provides an explicit textual source of constitutional protection against a particular sort of government behavior, that Amendment, not the more generalized notion of substantive due process, must be the guide for analyzing such a claim. Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 395 (1989). The Fourth Amendment addresses allegations of unreasonable searches, and the standards in I. (B)(1), above, are appropriately applied for consideration of both potential claims 4 Bella v. Chamberlain, 24 F.3d 1251, (10th Cir. N.M. 1994) 5 Brower v. County of Inyo, 489 U.S. 593 (1989) 6
7 Case 1:13-cv MSK-MJW Document 59 Filed 09/13/13 USDC Colorado Page 7 of 22 contained in the First Claim. Albright v. Oliver, 510 U.S. 266, 114 S. Ct. 807, 809, 127 L. Ed. 2d 114 (1994). Alternatively, personal participation is an essential element of this 42 U.S.C claim. See, Brief I. To the extent Plaintiff claims that Defendants abused their authority in an arbitrary and oppressive action in a manner that shocks the conscience 6, the TAC falls short in alleging such action. The First Claim does not even recite the terms arbitrary and oppressive or shocks the conscience, much less allege facts supporting them. See Brief Section IV. C. Elements of claim of unlawful search by Y.C. against DHS Defendant McAfee not supported by the Third Amended Complaint. 1. Attempted Strip Search Plaintiffs fail to allege all three elements. No clearly established right was violated. To the extent Plaintiff Y.C. claims a Fourth Amendment violation by Defendant McAfee for an attempted strip-search, Plaintiff s own allegations concede that no such search actually occurred. TAC, 41; 43; 70. Therefore, no Fourth Amendment violation occurred and Plaintiff Y.C. has no standing to bring this claim. Sanchez v. Port Authority of New York & New Jersey, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1637(S.D.N.Y. Feb. 17, 1992); Abbott Labs v. Gardner, 387 U.S. 136, , (1967). D. Elements of claim of unlawful search by Y.C. against DHS Defendants Hoover and Little not supported by the Third Amended Complaint. 1. Attempted Strip Search 6 See Seegmiller v. LaVerkin City, 528 F.3d 762, 767 (10th Cir. 2008) 7
8 Case 1:13-cv MSK-MJW Document 59 Filed 09/13/13 USDC Colorado Page 8 of 22 Plaintiff fails to allege all three elements. No clearly established right was violated. Further, Plaintiff fails to establish any personal participation by Defendants Hoover and Little in the attempted search. See Brief I. and IV. E. Elements of claim of unlawful search by Y.C. against EPSO Defendants not supported by the Third Amended Complaint. 1. Attempted Strip Search Plaintiff fails to allege all three elements. No clearly established right was violated. Further, Plaintiff fails to establish any personal participation by Defendants Price, Harris and Dearmont in the attempted search. See Brief I. and IV. F. Elements of claim of Fourteenth Amendment Substantive Due Process violation by Y.C. not supported by the Third Amended Complaint. See Section I B above. II. SECOND CLAIM: RIGHT TO PRIVACY SECURED BY THE FOURTH AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS BY PLAINTIFF Y.C. AGAINST DHS AND EPSO DEFENDANTS. A. Burden of proof. 1. Rule 12(b)(6): See I. (A)(1) above. 2. County Defendants have raised qualified immunity. Once raised, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to demonstrate the two prongs. See Brief III. B. Elements of a Fourth Amendment Right to Privacy Claim. Similar to the First Claim, the Second Claim is raised under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments, based on the same alleged facts surrounding the April 19, 2012 incident. While it is clear that Y.C. alleges a Fourth Amendment violation See Section I. above, it is not clear whether statements about the 8
9 Case 1:13-cv MSK-MJW Document 59 Filed 09/13/13 USDC Colorado Page 9 of 22 Fourteenth Amendment protecting a sphere of privacy in the naked body 7 are intended to articulate a separate substantive due process claim or simply support the Fourth Amendment claim. Regardless, the Second Claim should be analyzed under -Section I. above. C. Elements of a Fourteenth Amendment Right to Privacy Claim. To the extent a Fourteenth Amendment privacy claim is considered, the Court should apply the following analytical framework: (1) if the party asserting right has legitimate expectation of privacy; (2) if the subject of the privacy interest has been disclosed, Plaintiffs would need to establish that disclosure did not serve a compelling state interest; and (3) whether disclosure was made in the least intrusive manner. Nilson v. Layton City, 45 F.3d 369 (10th Cir. 1995). D. Elements of Right to Privacy Claim under the Fourth Amendment not supported by the Third Amended Complaint. Plaintiff fails to allege all three elements against Defendants. No clearly established right was violated. Further, Plaintiff fails to establish any personal participation by DHS Defendants Hoover Little, and EPSO Defendants Harris, Price and Dearmont. E. Elements of Right to Privacy Claim under the Fourteenth Amendment not supported by the Third Amended Complaint. Plaintiff fails to establish elements (2) and (3). No clearly established right was violated. In fact, the claim is based entirely upon a strip search that never happened because Y.C. refused to expose her injuries then fled with Jane Doe. TAC, 41, TAC,
10 Case 1:13-cv MSK-MJW Document 59 Filed 09/13/13 USDC Colorado Page 10 of 22 III. THIRD CLAIM: UNREASONABLE SEIZURE BY PLAINTIFF Y.C. AGAINST DHS AND EPSO DEFENDANTS. A. Burden of proof. 1. Rule 12(b)(6): See I. (A)(1) above. 2. County Defendants have raised qualified immunity Once raised, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to demonstrate the two prongs. See Brief III. B. Elements of a Fourth Amendment Unreasonable Seizure Claim. See I. (B)(1) above. C. Elements of Fourth Amendment Unreasonable Seizure Claim not supported by the Third Amended Complaint. Plaintiff Y.C. next contends that she was seized by the Colorado State Patrol in a felony stop. TAC, 197. While with this claim Plaintiff properly alleges a seizure contemplated by the Fourth Amendment, the Third Amended Complaint does not support elements 1 or 3. No clearly established right was violated. Further, Plaintiff fails to allege personal participation on the part of DHS defendants, that the seizure was unreasonable. 1. DHS Defendants did not personally participate in the felony stop. Plaintiff Y.C. fails to plead any personal participation by DHS Defendants in the felony-stop seizure of Plaintiff Y.C. Plaintiff Y.C. was seized by the Colorado State Patrol. TAC, ; EPSO Defendants did not personally participate in the felony stop. Plaintiff Y.C. also fails to establish any individual personal participation by any EPSO Defendants; the stop was effectuated by the Colorado State Patrol. Id. 10
11 Case 1:13-cv MSK-MJW Document 59 Filed 09/13/13 USDC Colorado Page 11 of The custody order was valid and reasonable. The facts alleged in the Third Amended Complaint support a conclusion that DHS and EPSO Defendants did reasonably believe that Y.C. faced danger to warrant seeking temporary protective custody. See Brief Section VI, A. 4. The felony stop was a reasonable seizure. The felony stop seizure of the vehicle in which Y.C. was a passenger was based upon probable cause to believe evidence of a crime existed in the vehicle (injuries to minor child, Plaintiff Y.C.). IV. FOURTH CLAIM: VIOLATION OF FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS BY PLAINTIFF JOHN DOE AGAINST DHS AND EPSO DEFENDANTS. A. Burden of proof. 1. Rule 12(b)(6): See I. (A)(1) above. 2. County Defendants have raised qualified immunity. Once raised, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to demonstrate the two prongs. See Brief III. B. Elements of First Amendment Retaliation Claim. To establish a 1983 First Amendment retaliation claim, Plaintiff must allege sufficient facts to support a plausible finding that: (1) Plaintiff was engaged in a constitutionally protected activity; (2) a defendant's action caused Plaintiff to suffer an injury that would chill a person of ordinary firmness from continuing to engage in that activity; and (3) a defendant's action was substantially motivated as a response to Plaintiffs exercise of his First Amendment speech rights. C. Elements of claim for First Amendment violation not supported by the Third Amended Complaint. 11
12 Case 1:13-cv MSK-MJW Document 59 Filed 09/13/13 USDC Colorado Page 12 of 22 Plaintiff fails to allege facts to support all three elements: Element 1: the Third Amended Complaint does not allege that John Doe was engaged in constitutionally protected activity; Element 2: the Third Amended Complaint does not allege that John Doe suffered an injury that would chill a person of ordinary firmness from exercising their constitutional rights; and Element 3: the Third Amended Complaint does not allege that that Defendants actions were motivated as a response to an assertion of First Amendment rights. No clearly established right was violated. VII. Further, Plaintiff fails to allege personal participation. See Brief I. and V. FIFTH CLAIM: VIOLATION OF FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS BY PLAINTIFF JANE DOE AGAINST DHS AND EPSO DEFENDANTS. A. Burden of proof. 1. Rule 12(b)(6): See I. (A)(1) above.. 2. County Defendants have raised qualified immunity. Once raised, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to demonstrate the two prongs. See Brief III. B. Elements of First Amendment Retaliation Claim. See IV. (B) above. C. Elements of claim for First Amendment violation not supported by the Third Amended Complaint. Plaintiff fails to allege facts to support all three elements: Element 1: The Third Amended Complaint does not allege that Jane Doe was engaged in constitutionally protected activity; Element 2: The Third Amended Complaint does not allege that Jane Doe suffered an injury that would chill a person of 12
13 Case 1:13-cv MSK-MJW Document 59 Filed 09/13/13 USDC Colorado Page 13 of 22 ordinary firmness from exercising their constitutional rights; and Element 3: The Third Amended Complaint does not allege that that Defendants actions were motivated as a response to an assertion of First Amendment rights. No clearly established right was violated. Further, Plaintiff fails to allege personal participation. See Brief I. and VIII. VI. SIXTH CLAIM: VIOLATION OF FOURTH AMENDMENT SEARCH AND SEIZURE RIGHTS BY PLAINTIFF JANE DOE AGAINST DHS AND EPSO DEFENDANTS. A. Burden of proof. 1. Rule 12(b)(6): See I. (A)(1) above. 2. County Defendants have raised qualified immunity. Once raised, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to demonstrate the two prongs. See Brief III. B. Elements of claim of Fourth Amendment unconstitutional search and seizure. See I. (B)(1) above. C. Elements of claim for Fourth Amendment violation not supported by the Third Amended Complaint. 1. Elements of claim unlawful search and seizure by Jane Doe against DHS Defendants not supported by the Third Amended Complaint. Plaintiff alleges a seizure contemplated by the Fourth Amendment. The Third Amended Complaint does not support elements 1 or 3. Furthermore, Plaintiff fails to allege personal participation. See Section III. (C) above. 2. Elements of claim unlawful search and seizure by Jane Doe against EPSO Defendants not supported by the Third Amended Complaint. 13
14 Case 1:13-cv MSK-MJW Document 59 Filed 09/13/13 USDC Colorado Page 14 of 22 Plaintiff alleges a seizure contemplated by the Fourth Amendment. The Third Amended Complaint does not support elements 1 or 3. Further, Plaintiff fails to allege personal participation. See Section III. (C) above. VII. SEVENTH CLAIM: VIOLATION OF FOURTH AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT LIBERTY INTERESTS IN CARE, CUSTODY AND CONTROL OF CHILDREN, AND IN FAMILIAL ASSOCIATION AND PRIVACY BY PLAINTIFFS JOHN AND JANE DOE AGAINST DHS AND EPSO DEFENDANTS. A. Burden of proof. 1. Rule 12(b)(6): See I. (A)(1) above. 2. County Defendants have raised qualified immunity. Once raised, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to demonstrate the two prongs. See Brief III. B. Elements of a Fourth Amendment Claim. See I. (B)(1) above. C. Elements of a Fourteenth Amendment substantive and procedural due process claim. The elements of claim of violation of right to familial association and privacy: To determine whether a person's familial association rights have been violated, a court weighs two factors: 1) the state's interests in investigating reports of child abuse; and (2) a plaintiff s interests in the familial right of association. Griffin v. Strong, 983 F.2d 1544, 1547 (10th Cir. 1993). D. Elements not supported by the Third Amended Complaint. 1. Elements of claim of Fourth Amendment violation of John and Jane Doe against DHS and EPSO Defendants associated with the basis for the Custody Order not supported by the Third Amended Complaint. 14
15 Case 1:13-cv MSK-MJW Document 59 Filed 09/13/13 USDC Colorado Page 15 of 22 Plaintiffs fail to articulate any basis for any Fourth Amendment violation or any of the three associated elements for Claim Seven. Plaintiffs appear to assert that their Fourth Amendment rights were violated when a court issued a custody order concerning their children. TAC, ; 271. Plaintiffs John and Jane Doe do not have standing to assert a violation of constitutional rights for their children. Archuleta v. McShan, 897 F.2d 495, 497 (10th Cir.1990) (citing Dohaish v. Tooley, 670 F.2d 934, 936 (10th Cir.1982)). No clearly established right was violated. County Defendants incorporate their argument from Section I. (B)(1) above concerning Jane Doe s Fourth Amendment violation claims. Further, Plaintiffs fail to allege personal participation by DHS Defendants Tremaine, Hoover and Little; and EPSO Defendants Harris, Price and Dearmont. 2. Elements of claim of Fourteenth Amendment violations claimed by Plaintiffs against DHS and EPSO Defendants not supported by the Third Amended Complaint. Plaintiffs fail to allege facts to support either element: Element 1: The Third amended complaint does not allege that the state interest in investigating reports of child abuse did not exist; and Element 2: The Third Amended Complaint does not allege plaintiffs interest in the familial right of association was violated. No clearly established right was violated. Further, Plaintiffs fail to allege personal participation by DHS Defendants Tremaine, Hoover and Little; and EPSO Defendants Harris, Price and Dearmont. See Brief I. and X. VIII. A EIGHTH CLAIM: VIOLATION OF FOURTH AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT LIBERTY INTERESTS IN FAMILIAL ASSOCIATION AND 15
16 Case 1:13-cv MSK-MJW Document 59 Filed 09/13/13 USDC Colorado Page 16 of 22 PRIVACY BY PLAINTIFFS E.C., E.S.C., AND J.C. AGAINST DHS AND EPSO DEFENDANTS. A. Burden of proof. 1. Rule 12(b)(6): See I. (A)(1) above. 2. County Defendants have raised qualified immunity. Once raised, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to demonstrate the two prongs. See Brief III. B. Elements of claims Fourth Amendment Violation. See I. (B)(1) above. C. Elements of claim of violation Fourteenth Amendment Right to familial association and privacy. See VII. (C) above. D. Elements of claim of violation Fourteenth Amendment Right substantive due process claim. See I. (B) above. E. Elements of claim of unlawful search and seizure by Plaintiffs against DHS Defendants not supported by the Third Amended Complaint. Plaintiffs fail to allege any of the three elements of a Fourth Amendment seizure. County Defendants are unclear what Fourth Amendment Right Plaintiffs are claiming was violated. 8 Further, Plaintiffs fail to allege any personal participation by DHS Defendants Hoover and Little. E. Elements of claim unlawful search and seizure by Plaintiffs against EPSO Defendants not supported by the Third Amended Complaint. Plaintiffs fail to allege all three elements of a Fourth Amendment seizure. No clearly established right was violated. 8 Claim Nine also claims a Fourth Amendment violation on behalf of E.C., E.C.S., and J.C. 16
17 Case 1:13-cv MSK-MJW Document 59 Filed 09/13/13 USDC Colorado Page 17 of 22 Further, Plaintiffs fail to allege any personal participation by EPSO Defendants Harris, Price and Dearmont. Plaintiffs allegations fail to establish that any EPSO Defendants personally participated in their removal from their home, school, father or North Carolina. TAC, F. Elements of claim of Fourteenth Amendment violations claimed by Plaintiffs against DHS and EPSO Defendants not supported by the Third Amended Complaint. To the extent Plaintiffs E.C., E.S.C. and J.C. attempt to bring a Fourteenth Amendment claim; they fail to allege facts to support either element. No clearly established right was violated. See Brief, XI. (C) IX. NINTH CLAIM: UNREASONABLE SEIZURE IN VIOLATION OF THE FOURTH AMENDMENT BY PLAINTIFFS E.C., E.S.C., AND J.C. AGAINST DHS AND EPSO DEFENDANTS. A. Burden of proof. 1. Rule 12(b)(6): I. (A)(1) above. 2. County Defendants have raised qualified immunity. Once raised, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to demonstrate the two prongs. See Brief III. B. Elements of Fourth Amendment Search and Seizure violation. See I. (B)(1) above. C. Elements not supported by the Complaint. Plaintiffs fail to meet all three elements. The Third Amended Complaint does not support a plausible finding that Plaintiffs E.C., E.S.C. and J.C. were subject to any search or any seizure. County Defendants have raised qualified immunity. Once raised, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to demonstrate the two prongs. See Brief III. 17
18 Case 1:13-cv MSK-MJW Document 59 Filed 09/13/13 USDC Colorado Page 18 of 22 Further, Plaintiffs fail to allege any personal participation by DHS Defendants Hoover and Little, and EPSO Defendants Harris, Price and Dearmont. X. TENTH CLAIM: MUNICIPAL LIABILITY FOR UNCONSTITUTIONAL POLICY, CUSTOM OR PRACTICE A. Burden of proof. Rule 12(b)(6): See I. (A)(1) above. B. Elements of a Municipal Liability Policy, Custom or Practice Claim. The essential elements for a 1983 municipal liability claim for illegal policy, custom or practice are: (1) that an unconstitutional municipal policy, custom or practice exists; and (2) a direct causal link between the policy or custom and the injury alleged. Graves v. Thomas, 450 F.3d 1215, 1218 (10th Cir. 2006), citing City of Canton, Ohio v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378, 385, (1989). As to the second requirement, a plaintiff must demonstrate that, through its deliberate conduct, the municipality was the moving force behind the injury alleged. Board of County Commissioners v. Brown, 520 U.S. 397, 399 (1997)(emphasis in original). C. Elements not supported by the Third Amended Complaint. Plaintiffs fail to allege either element of a municipal liability custom, policy or practice claim. Furthermore, Plaintiffs fail to allege any facts to support any named Defendant was the moving force behind the injury. Eleventh Amendment applies. See Brief II. A municipal liability against DHS or its employees in their official capacity is barred by the Eleventh Amendment. 18
19 Case 1:13-cv MSK-MJW Document 59 Filed 09/13/13 USDC Colorado Page 19 of 22 D. BOCC Defendant is an improper party. To the extent Plaintiffs are seeking to hold BOCC Defendant responsible for the actions and/or policies and customs of the DHS Defendants or EPSO Defendants, it is an improperly named defendant. Plaintiffs are unable to state a claim against BOCC Defendant. Tunget v. Board of County Comm'rs, 992 P.2d 650 (Colo. App. 1999). XI. ELEVENTH CLAIM: LIABILITY FOR FAILURE TO TRAIN OR SUPERVISE. A. Burden of proof. See, I. (A)(1) above. B. Elements of a 1983 Claim for Supervisory Liability. Although, a government entity can be held liable under 1983 for failure to adequately train its employees, City of Canton, Ohio, v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378, (1989), it is not sufficient for a plaintiff to simply assert that an existing training program for employees represents a policy for which a municipality is responsible. Id. at 389. To satisfy the deliberate indifference standard for a failure to train claim in the Tenth Circuit, a plaintiff must meet the four-part test established in Brown v. Whitman, 651 F. Supp. 2d 1216, (D. Colo. 2009), namely that training was, in fact, inadequate, and: (1) constitutional limitations were exceeded; (2) during a usual and recurring situation; (3) inadequate training demonstrates a deliberate indifference toward citizens coming into contact with government employees at issue; and (4) there is a direct causal link between the constitutional deprivation and the inadequate training. C. Elements of a Supervisory Liability claim not supported by the Third Amended Complaint. 19
20 Case 1:13-cv MSK-MJW Document 59 Filed 09/13/13 USDC Colorado Page 20 of 22 Plaintiffs fail to allege all elements for municipal liability for failure to train or supervise. Further, the Eleventh Amendment applies see Brief II. A municipal liability against DHS or its employees in their official capacity is barred by the Eleventh Amendment. D. BOCC Defendant is an improper party. To the extent Plaintiffs are seeking to hold BOCC Defendant responsible for the actions and/or policies and customs of the DHS Defendants or EPSO Defendants, it is an improperly named defendant. Plaintiffs are unable to state a claim against Defendant BOCC. Tunget v. Board of County Comm'rs, 992 P.2d 650 (Colo. App. 1999). XII. TWELFTH CLAIM: RETALIATORY PROSECUTION A. Burden of proof. 1. Rule 12(b)(6): See I. (A)(1) above. 2. County Defendants have raised qualified immunity. Once raised, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to demonstrate the two prongs. See Brief III. B. Elements of a Retaliatory Prosecution Claim. The elements the Plaintiff must plead and prove of a First Amendment Retaliatory Prosecution claim are: (1) plaintiff was engaged in a constitutionally protected activity; (2) that a defendant's action caused plaintiff to suffer an injury that would chill a person of ordinary firmness from continuing to engage in that activity; and (3) that a defendant's action was substantially motivated as a response to plaintiff s exercise of his First Amendment speech rights; and (4) an 20
21 Case 1:13-cv MSK-MJW Document 59 Filed 09/13/13 USDC Colorado Page 21 of 22 lack of probable cause for the prosecution. Worrell v. Henry, 219 F.3d 1197, 1212 (10th Cir.2000); and Hartman v. Moore, 547 U.S. 250, (2006). C. Elements not supported by the Third Amended Complaint. Plaintiff has failed to plead any facts sufficient for all the required elements. See Brief XV. CONCLUSION: WHEREFORE, County Defendants respectfully requests this Honorable Court dismiss Plaintiffs Third Amended Complaint. County Defendants further request this Court enter judgment in favor of County Defendants and against Plaintiffs for attorney s fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C and for costs. RESPECTFULLY submitted this 13 th day of September, By: s/ Diana K. May Diana K. May Senior Assistant County Attorney Office of the County Attorney of El Paso County, Colorado 200 S. Cascade Colorado Springs, CO (719) Fax: (719) dianamay@elpasoco.com Attorney for County Defendants BY: s/ Kenneth R. Hodges Kenneth R. Hodges, Reg. Assistant County Attorney 200 S. Cascade Ave. Colorado Springs, CO (719) Fax (719) Attorney for County Defendants 21
22 Case 1:13-cv MSK-MJW Document 59 Filed 09/13/13 USDC Colorado Page 22 of 22 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on September 13, 2013, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system which will send a copy of the foregoing to the following CM/ECF participant as follows: Theresa Lynn Sidebotham Telios Law PLLC P.O. Box 3488 Monument, CO tls@telioslaw.com Gillian M. Fahlsing Monica N. Kovaci Senter Goldfarb & Rice, L.L.C Broadway, Suite 1700 Denver, CO Telephone: (303) FAX: (303) s: gfahlsing@sgrllc.com; mkovaci@sgrllc.com By: s/ C. Campbell 22
Case 1:14-cv WYD-MEH Document 26 Filed 07/17/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:14-cv-00262-WYD-MEH Document 26 Filed 07/17/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 6 Civil Action No. 14 cv 00262-WYD-MEH MALIBU MEDIA, L.L.C., v. Plaintiff, RICHARD SADOWSKI, Defendant. IN THE UNITED STATES
More informationCase 1:08-cv RPM Document 12 Filed 01/16/09 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:08-cv-02517-RPM Document 12 Filed 01/16/09 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 5 Civil Action No. 08-cv-02517-RPM MURRY L. SALBY, v. Plaintiff, UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO, and PROVOST PHILLIP DISTEFANO, IN THE
More informationCase 2:13-cv CG-WPL Document 17 Filed 09/18/13 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
Case 2:13-cv-00727-CG-WPL Document 17 Filed 09/18/13 Page 1 of 10 DAVID ECKERT Plaintiff, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO vs. No. 2:13-cv-00727-CG/WPL THE CITY OF DEMING. DEMING
More informationCase 5:07-cv C Document 27 Filed 12/19/2007 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 5:07-cv-00514-C Document 27 Filed 12/19/2007 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA VELIE and VELIE, P.L.L.C., JONATHAN VELIE Plaintiff, vs. Case No.
More informationCase 3:17-cv DJH Document 3 Filed 02/06/17 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 13
Case 3:17-cv-00071-DJH Document 3 Filed 02/06/17 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY LOUISVILLE DIVISION [Filed Electronically] JACOB HEALEY and LARRY LOUIS
More informationto redress his civil and legal rights, and alleges as follows: 1. Plaintiff, Anthony Truchan, is a resident of Nutley, New Jersey.
MICHAEL D. SUAREZ ID# 011921976 SUAREZ & SUAREZ 2016 Kennedy Boulevard Jersey City, New Jersey 07305 (201) 433-0778 Attorneys for Plaintiff, Anthony Truchan Plaintiff, ANTHONY TRUCHAN vs. SUPERIOR COURT
More informationCase 2:17-cv EEF-MBN Document 66 Filed 11/07/17 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
Case 2:17-cv-06197-EEF-MBN Document 66 Filed 11/07/17 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA ADRIAN CALISTE AND BRIAN GISCLAIR, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS
More informationCase: 1:15-cv Document #: 71 Filed: 09/06/16 Page 1 of 15 PageID #:298
Case: 1:15-cv-09050 Document #: 71 Filed: 09/06/16 Page 1 of 15 PageID #:298 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION JOHN HOLLIMAN, ) ) Plaintiff, ) Case
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) No. 4:17-cv JAR ) ) MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Doe v. Francis Howell School District Doc. 35 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION JANE DOE, Plaintiff, v. No. 4:17-cv-01301-JAR FRANCIS HOWELL SCHOOL DISTRICT, et
More informationCase 1:06-cv VM-HBP Document 1 Filed 07/10/06 Page 1 of 9
Case 1:06-cv-05206-VM-HBP Document 1 Filed 07/10/06 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -----------------------------------------------------------------------X KENNETH
More informationCase 1:18-cv CMA-KMT Document 1 Filed 12/21/18 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO.
Case 1:18-cv-03305-CMA-KMT Document 1 Filed 12/21/18 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO VDARE FOUNDATION, v. Plaintiff, CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS, JOHN
More informationCase 2:13-cv JB-WPL Document 42 Filed 12/11/13 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
Case 2:13-cv-00727-JB-WPL Document 42 Filed 12/11/13 Page 1 of 11 DAVID ECKERT Plaintiff, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO vs. No. 2:13-cv-00727-JB/WPL THE CITY OF DEMING. DEMING
More informationCase 1:15-cv KLM Document 34 Filed 09/16/16 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:15-cv-01927-KLM Document 34 Filed 09/16/16 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 12 Civil Action No. 15-cv-01927-KLM IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO GINA M. KILPATRICK, individually
More informationcase 2:14-cv PPS-JEM document 15 filed 09/21/14 page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA HAMMOND DIVISION
case 2:14-cv-00234-PPS-JEM document 15 filed 09/21/14 page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA HAMMOND DIVISION NICHOLAS KINCADE, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) NO: 2:14-CV-234-PPS-JEM
More informationv. COURT USE ONLY Defendant: ***** Case Number: **** Attorneys for Defendant:
County Court, City and County of Denver, Colorado Lindsey Flanigan Courthouse, Room 160 520 W. Colfax Ave. Denver, CO 80204 Plaintiff: The People of the State of Colorado v. COURT USE ONLY Defendant: *****
More informationCase 2:17-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 12/12/17 Page 1 of 10
Case 2:17-cv-00377 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 12/12/17 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION DEVON ARMSTRONG vs. CIVIL ACTION NO.
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
CASE 0:12-cv-00738-MJD-AJB Document 3 Filed 03/29/12 Page 1 of 21 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Melissa Hill, v. Plaintiff, Civil File No. 12-CV-738 MJD/AJB AMENDED COMPLAINT AND DEMAND
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI ABERDEEN DIVISION V. CIVIL ACTION NO.
Jauch v. Choctaw County et al Doc. 31 JESSICA JAUCH IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI ABERDEEN DIVISION PLAINTIFF V. CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:15-CV-75-SA-SAA CHOCTAW
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO. JOHN W. HICKENLOOPER, Governor of the State of Colorado, MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER
Case 1:13-cv-01300-MSK-MJW Document 82 Filed 09/25/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 13-cv-01300-MSK-MJW JOHN B. COOKE, Sheriff
More informationCase 3:11-cv JCH Document 96 Filed 11/16/11 Page 1 of 13
Case 3:11-cv-00614-JCH Document 96 Filed 11/16/11 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT -----------------------------------------------------------------------x JOSEPH JEAN-CHARLES,
More informationCase 4:12-cv JED-PJC Document 40 Filed in USDC ND/OK on 06/03/13 Page 1 of 10
Case 4:12-cv-00495-JED-PJC Document 40 Filed in USDC ND/OK on 06/03/13 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA (1) THE ESTATE OF JAMES DYLAN ) GONZALES, by
More informationCOMPLAINT NATURE OF THE ACTION PARTIES
Case 6:17-cv-06004-MWP Document 1 Filed 01/03/17 Page 1 of 19 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DUDLEY T. SCOTT, Plaintiff, -vs- CITY OF ROCHESTER, MICHAEL L. CIMINELLI,
More informationCase 3:15-cv MHL Document 4 Filed 10/20/15 Page 1 of 2 PageID# 16
Case 3:15-cv-00349-MHL Document 4 Filed 10/20/15 Page 1 of 2 PageID# 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division JAIME S. ALFARO-GARCIA, Plaintiff, v. HENRICO
More informationCASE 0:12-cv PJS-TNL Document 15 Filed 08/14/12 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
CASE 0:12-cv-00824-PJS-TNL Document 15 Filed 08/14/12 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Civil File No.:12-CV-824 (PJS/TNL) WILLIAM DEMONE WALKER ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) AMENDED
More informationCase 1:13-cv MSK-MJW Document 3 Filed 05/17/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:13-cv-01300-MSK-MJW Document 3 Filed 05/17/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 5 Instructions Regarding Notice of Availability of a United States Magistrate Judge to Exercise Jurisdiction Pursuant to 28
More informationIN THE COMMON PLEAS COURT OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OHIO CIVIL DIVISION. DAVID ESRATI : Case No CV Plaintiff, : Judge Richard Skelton
ELECTRONICALLY FILED COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Wednesday, March 7, 2018 11:47:51 AM CASE NUMBER: 2018 CV 00593 Docket ID: 31942993 RUSSELL M JOSEPH CLERK OF COURTS MONTGOMERY COUNTY OHIO IN THE COMMON PLEAS
More informationCase 1:15-cv MJW Document 89 Filed 04/11/16 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:15-cv-01523-MJW Document 89 Filed 04/11/16 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 9 Civil Action No. 15-cv-01523-MJW ROBERT W. SANCHEZ, Plaintiff, v. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
More informationCase 2:18-cv PMW Document 2 Filed 06/06/18 Page 1 of 21 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION
Case 2:18-cv-00445-PMW Document 2 Filed 06/06/18 Page 1 of 21 MARK L. SHURTLEFF (USB 4666) SHURTLEFF LAW FIRM, PC P.O. Box 900873 Sandy, Utah 84090 (801) 441-9625 mark@shurtlefflawfirm.com Attorney for
More information(D-036) MR. WATTS OBJECTION TO GOVERNMENT MOTION [K]
District Court, Weld County, Colorado Court address: 901 9 th Avenue, Greeley, CO 80631 PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, Plaintiff v. CHRISTOPHER WATTS, Defendant John Walsh, Atty. Reg. No. 42616 Kathryn
More informationNOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FILED OCT 03 2016 STEVEN O. PETERSEN, on behalf of L.P., a minor and beneficiary and as Personal Representative of the estate of
More informationCase 1:11-cv JHM-HBB Document 1 Filed 12/12/11 Page 1 of 15 PageID #: 1
Case 1:11-cv-00189-JHM-HBB Document 1 Filed 12/12/11 Page 1 of 15 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY BOWLING GREEN DIVISION [Filed Electronically] STUART COLE and LOREN
More informationCase: 2:16-cv ALM-EPD Doc #: 1 Filed: 03/02/16 Page: 1 of 9 PAGEID #: 1
Case 216-cv-00195-ALM-EPD Doc # 1 Filed 03/02/16 Page 1 of 9 PAGEID # 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION Officer Jeffrey Lazar Columbus Division of
More information){
Brown v. City of New York Doc. 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------){ NOT FOR PUBLICATION MARGIE BROWN, -against- Plaintiff,
More informationCase 1:15-cv WJM-NYW Document 45 Filed 10/28/15 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 7
Case 1:15-cv-00166-WJM-NYW Document 45 Filed 10/28/15 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 7 Civil Action No. 15-cv-0166-WJM-NYW TAMMY FISHER, v. Plaintiff, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
More informationCase 4:10-cv TSH Document 4 Filed 02/24/11 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
Case 4:10-cv-40257-TSH Document 4 Filed 02/24/11 Page 1 of 9 WAKEELAH A. COCROFT, ) Plaintiff ) ) v. ) ) JEREMY SMITH, ) Defendant ) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS C.A. No. 10-40257-FDS
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA - Alexandria Division -
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA - Alexandria Division - IN RE: BLACKWATER ALIEN TORT CLAIMS ACT LITIGATION Case No. 1:09-cv-615 Case No. 1:09-cv-616 Case No. 1:09-cv-617
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA
Case 5:16-cv-00349-HE Document 1 Filed 04/12/16 Page 1 of 21 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA 1. ADAIRA GARDNER, individually, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v.
More informationCase 1:18-cv MSK-KMT Document 1 Filed 09/18/18 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 29 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:18-cv-02386-MSK-KMT Document 1 Filed 09/18/18 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 29 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF COLORADO SCOTT BEAN and JOSHUA FERGUSON, individually and on behalf of others similarly
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
JERRY McCORMICK, FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit Plaintiff-Appellant, FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT June 4, 2013 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court v. THE CITY
More informationCase 1:18-cv MSK-NYW Document 36 Filed 09/27/18 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:18-cv-01225-MSK-NYW Document 36 Filed 09/27/18 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 8 Civil Action No. 18-cv-1225-MSK-NYW RUTHIE JORDAN, and MARY PATRICIA GRAHAM-KELLY, Plaintiffs, v. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT
More informationCase: 1:16-cv DAP Doc #: 11 Filed: 11/28/16 1 of 6. PageID #: 71 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION
Case: 1:16-cv-02325-DAP Doc #: 11 Filed: 11/28/16 1 of 6. PageID #: 71 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION ANTHONY NOVAK, Plaintiff, v. THE CITY OF PARMA, et
More informationCase 1:11-cv SEB-MJD Document 138 Filed 12/21/11 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 978
Case 1:11-cv-00708-SEB-MJD Document 138 Filed 12/21/11 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 978 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION INGRID BUQUER, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Cause
More informationCase 1:17-cv WYD-MEH Document 9 Filed 09/22/17 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 9 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:17-cv-02280-WYD-MEH Document 9 Filed 09/22/17 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 9 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 1:17-cv-02280-WYD-MEH ME2 PRODUCTIONS, INC.,
More informationCOMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND
2:17-cv-12623-GAD-EAS Doc # 1 Filed 08/10/17 Pg 1 of 32 Pg ID 1 JOSE SUAREZ, vs. Plaintiff, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION CITY OF WARREN; LIEUTENANT JAMES
More informationCase: 1:15-cv Document #: 32 Filed: 12/07/15 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:86
Case: 1:15-cv-07588 Document #: 32 Filed: 12/07/15 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:86 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION JANE DOE, a Minor, by and through
More informationCase 4:16-cv Document 27 Filed in TXSD on 06/06/17 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION
Case 4:16-cv-03577 Document 27 Filed in TXSD on 06/06/17 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION United States District Court Southern District of Texas ENTERED
More informationCase 8:13-cv JSM-AEP Document 17 Filed 01/14/14 Page 1 of 12 PageID 64 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION
Case 8:13-cv-03084-JSM-AEP Document 17 Filed 01/14/14 Page 1 of 12 PageID 64 SHELENE JEAN-LOUIS, JUDES PETIT-FRERE, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:10-cv-00059-WDM-MEH Document 6 Filed 03/01/10 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 10-CV-00059-WDM-MEH GRAY PETERSON, Plaintiff,
More informationCase 3:08-cv DAK Document 31 Filed 02/25/2009 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION
Case 308-cv-01868-DAK Document 31 Filed 02/25/2009 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION DARLA JENNINGS, as guardian of the estate of S.W., a minor DARLA
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 06-cv-01964-WYD-CBS STEVEN HOWARDS, v. Plaintiff, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO VIRGIL D. GUS REICHLE, JR., in his individual and official capacity,
More informationCase: 4:13-cv HEA Doc. #: 27 Filed: 12/02/13 Page: 1 of 15 PageID #: 128
Case: 4:13-cv-00711-HEA Doc. #: 27 Filed: 12/02/13 Page: 1 of 15 PageID #: 128 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION Michael J. Elli, individually and on behalf of
More informationCase 1:18-cv RBJ Document 22 Filed 01/31/19 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ Document 22 Filed 01/31/19 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 13 Civil Action No. 1:18-cv-03204-RBJ LORI FRANK, vs. Plaintiff, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION
MICHELLE R. MATHIS, Plaintiff, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION Civil Action 2:12-cv-00363 v. Judge Edmund A. Sargus Magistrate Judge E.A. Preston Deavers DEPARTMENT
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION MEMORANDUM OPINION
Doe v. Corrections Corporation of America et al Doc. 72 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION JANE DOE, ET AL., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) NO. 3:15-cv-68
More informationCase 1:15-cv WJM-MJW Document 1 Filed 08/17/15 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:15-cv-01775-WJM-MJW Document 1 Filed 08/17/15 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 8 Civil Action No. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO ERIC VERLO; JANET MATZEN; and FULLY INFORMED
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Before KELLY, ANDERSON, and TYMKOVICH, Circuit Judges.
FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit DAVID FULLER; RUTH M. FULLER, grandparents, Plaintiffs - Appellants, FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT December 3, 2014 Elisabeth A.
More informationCase 3:17-cv DPJ-FKB Document 5 Filed 05/19/17 Page 1 of 15
Case 3:17-cv-00270-DPJ-FKB Document 5 Filed 05/19/17 Page 1 of 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI NORTHERN DIVISION TINA L. WALLACE PLAINTIFF VS. CITY OF JACKSON,
More informationCase 3:17-cv L Document 25 Filed 05/02/18 Page 1 of 6 PageID 171
Case 3:17-cv-03300-L Document 25 Filed 05/02/18 Page 1 of 6 PageID 171 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION MBA ENGINEERING, INC., as Sponsor and Administrator
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN LEO HARDY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. ) CITY OF MILWAUKEE, EDWARD FLYNN ) OFFICER MICHAEL GASSER, ) OFFICER KEITH GARLAND, JR. ) and unknown
More informationORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION. This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion for Temporary Restraining
DISTRICT COURT, EL PASO COUNTY, COLORADO 270 S. Tejon Colorado Springs, Colorado 80901 DATE FILED: March 19, 2018 11:58 PM CASE NUMBER: 2018CV30549 Plaintiffs: Saul Cisneros, Rut Noemi Chavez Rodriguez,
More information~/
Case 6:05-cv-00850-GAP-KRS Document 58 Filed 05/04/2006 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION CASE NO.: 6:05-CV-850-0RL-31-KRS RONALD M. P ARILLA, ALDA RUGG,
More informationCase 1:14-cv MPK Document 45 Filed 09/23/15 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Case 1:14-cv-00215-MPK Document 45 Filed 09/23/15 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA TINA DEETER, ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) Civil Action No. 14-215E
More informationCourthouse News Service
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------X JANE DOE, -against- Plaintiff, COUNTY OF ULSTER, ULSTER COUNTY SHERIFF S DEPARTMENT,
More informationCOMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
DISTRICT COURT, TELLER COUNTY, COLORADO 101 W. Bennett Avenue, Cripple Creek, Colorado 80813 Plaintiff: LEONARDO CANSECO SALINAS, v. Defendant: JASON MIKESELL, in his official capacity as Sheriff of Teller
More information)(
Case 1:07-cv-03339-MGC Document 1 Filed 04/26/07 Page 1 of 20 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -----------------------------------------------------------)( LUMUMBA BANDELE, DJIBRIL
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA GREENVILLE DIVISION
Kinard v. Greenville Police Department et al Doc. 26 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA GREENVILLE DIVISION Ira Milton Kinard, ) ) Plaintiff, ) C.A. No. 6:10-cv-03246-JMC
More informationMendez and 1983 WILLIAM W. KRUEGER III BENJAMIN J. GIBBS
Mendez and 1983 WILLIAM W. KRUEGER III BENJAMIN J. GIBBS Roadmap Overview of 1983 1983 Causation Examples: Municipal Liability Claims, First Amendment Retaliation Ninth Circuit s Provocation Rule The County
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION DOUGLAS W. MARTIN Plaintiff, v. No. 07 C 2800 Judge James B. Zagel OFFICER LUCKETT # 355, ROMEOVILLE POLICE DEPARTMENT, et al.,
More informationWhen a Use of Force is NOT a Constitutional Seizure
When a Use of Force is NOT a Constitutional Seizure By Brian S. Batterton Written for and Distributed by Public Agency Training Council, and PATC Partners and affiliates. For duplication & redistribution
More informationSaunders ("Saunders") searched W.S.G.,1 a student at Hermitage High School, for drugs.
Gallimore et al v. Henrico County School Board et al Doc. 24 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division DANIEL AND MANUELA GALLIMORE, PARENTS AND NEXT FRIENDS
More informationCase: 1:16-cv Document #: 20 Filed: 06/13/17 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:112
Case: 1:16-cv-09455 Document #: 20 Filed: 06/13/17 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:112 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION ANTHONY GIANONNE, Plaintiff, No. 16 C 9455
More informationPUBLISH UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT
FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit August 19, 2009 PUBLISH Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT P. CHRISTOPHER SWANSON, GERALDINE SCHMIDT, and
More informationU NITED STATES DISTRICT C OURT tor the
Case 1:12-cv-00992-RWS Document 1 Filed 02/08/12 Page 1 of 7 J\0 440 (Rev. 12/09 Summons in a Civil Action Chelsea Elliot and Jeanne Mansfield P/ainriff v. The City of New York, New York Police Department,
More informationSummons SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF WAYNE X
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF WAYNE --------------------------------------------------------------------X JANET E. ENOCH, STEVE O. HINDI, AND MICHAEL KOBLISKA, - against Plaintiff(s),
More informationCase 1:17-cv RM-GPG Document 83 Filed 03/30/18 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:17-cv-02512-RM-GPG Document 83 Filed 03/30/18 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 1:17-cv-02512-RM-GPG CSMN INVESTMENTS,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, WESTERN DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, WESTERN DIVISION KIRK CHRZANOWSKI, ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) No. 12 CV 50020 ) LOUIS A. BIANCHI, individually and in ) Judge: his
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN. v. Case No. 19-C-34 SCREENING ORDER
Ingram v. Gillingham et al Doc. 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN DARNELL INGRAM, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 19-C-34 ALEESHA GILLINGHAM, ERIC GROSS, DONNA HARRIS, and SALLY TESS,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA ) )
Case 4:15-cv-00324-GKF-TLW Document 65 Filed in USDC ND/OK on 04/25/16 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, )
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA TERRENCE BRESSI, Case No. Plaintiff, VERIFIED COMPLAINT. vs.
1 1 Ralph E. Ellinwood Ralph E. Ellinwood, Attorney at Law, PLLC SBA: 0 PO Box 01 Tucson, AZ 1 Phone: (0) 1- Fax: () 1- ree@yourbestdefense.com IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR THE DISTRICT
More informationCase 1:11-cv RHS-WDS Document 5 Filed 11/10/11 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
Case 1:11-cv-00946-RHS-WDS Document 5 Filed 11/10/11 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO LOS ALAMOS STUDY GROUP, v. Plaintiff, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY,
More informationCase 1:15-cv WJM-MJW Document 29 Filed 08/26/15 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:15-cv-01775-WJM-MJW Document 29 Filed 08/26/15 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 15-cv-1775-WJM-MJW ERIC VERLO; JANET MATZEN;
More informationLennox S. Hinds, Esq. Stevens, Hinds & White, P.C. 42 Van Doren Avenue Somerset, NJ
Case Case 3:07-cv-02314-JAP-JJH 1:33-av-00001 Document Document 939 1 Filed Filed 05/16/2007 Page Page 1 of 111 of 11 Lennox S. Hinds, Esq. Stevens, Hinds & White, P.C. 42 Van Doren Avenue Somerset, NJ
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA * CIVIL ACTION * * NO. * IN RE SEARCH AND SEIZURE * JUDGE * * MAGISTRATE COMPLAINT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA CIVIL ACTION NO. IN RE SEARCH AND SEIZURE JUDGE MAGISTRATE COMPLAINT Jurisdiction 1. Jurisdiction of this court is invoked pursuant to 28 U. S.
More informationIN UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
IN UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN Susan Doxtator, Arlie Doxtator, and Sarah Wunderlich, as Special Administrators of the Estate of Jonathon C. Tubby, Plaintiffs, Case
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit September 7, 2007 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court RODOLFO RIVERA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. TRAVIS
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK : PATRICIA WALLACE and COURTNEY : DOPP, : : COMPLAINT Plaintiffs, : : v. : Civil Action Number : THE COUNTY OF MONTGOMERY, : MICHAEL AMATO,
More information3:13-cv JFA Date Filed 04/04/13 Entry Number 4 Page 1 of 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
3:13-cv-00882-JFA Date Filed 04/04/13 Entry Number 4 Page 1 of 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA COLUMBIA DIVISION Charles Smith, individually and as Parent of Minor
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 18-cv-02593 MICKEY HOWARD v. Plaintiff, THE CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, COLORADO Defendant. COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND Plaintiff
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS. v. CASE NO SAC
Orange v. Lyon County Detention Center Doc. 4 KYNDAL GRANT ORANGE, Plaintiff, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS v. CASE NO. 18-3141-SAC LYON COUNTY DETENTION CENTER, Defendant.
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Senior Judge Wiley Y. Daniel
Duke-Roser v. Sisson, et al., Doc. 19 Civil Action No. 12-cv-02414-WYD-KMT KIMBERLY DUKE-ROSSER, v. Plaintiff, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Senior Judge Wiley Y. Daniel
More informationCase 0:10-cv WPD Document 24 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/31/2011 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 0:10-cv-61985-WPD Document 24 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/31/2011 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA GARDEN-AIRE VILLAGE SOUTH CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION INC., a Florida
More informationCase 1:12-cv WGY Document 6 Filed 10/04/12 Page 1 of 30 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRCT OF MASSACHUSETTS
Case 1:12-cv-40120-WGY Document 6 Filed 10/04/12 Page 1 of 30 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRCT OF MASSACHUSETTS ) ROBERTO CARLOS DOMINGUEZ, ) Plaintiff ) ) v. ) ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
More informationIN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA * * *
BRETT L. MCKAGUE, ESQ. SBN 0 JEREMY J. SCHROEDER, ESQ. SBN FLESHER MCKAGUE LLP 0 Plaza Drive Rocklin, CA Telephone: ().0 Facsimile: (). Attorneys for defendant and cross-defendant, GENTRY ASSOCIATES CONSTRUCTION
More informationCase 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 11/07/17 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:17-cv-02656 Document 1 Filed 11/07/17 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 17-cv-02656 Jasmine Still, v. Plaintiff, El Paso
More informationFerraro v. City of Long Branch, et al
1994 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 5-10-1994 Ferraro v. City of Long Branch, et al Precedential or Non-Precedential: Docket 93-5576 Follow this and additional
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY CAMDEN VICINAGE
Case 1:10-cv-03827-NLH -KMW Document 1 Filed 07/29/10 Page 1 of 19 PageD: 1 Edward Barocas, Esq. (EB8251) AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF NEW JERSEY FOUNDATION P.O. Box 32159 Newark, New Jersey 07102
More informationCLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND INDIVIDUAL CLAIM FOR DAMAGES
DISTRICT COURT, EL PASO COUNTY, COLORADO 270 S. Tejon Street Colorado Springs, Colorado 80901 Plaintiffs: Saul Cisneros, Rut Noemi Chavez Rodriguez, COURT USE ONLY Case Number: On behalf of themselves
More informationCase 1:08-cv Document 49 Filed 12/22/09 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
Case 1:08-cv-07200 Document 49 Filed 12/22/09 Page 1 of 9 David Bourke, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION Plaintiff, v. No. 08 C 7200 Judge James B. Zagel County
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
GEORGE HALL, FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT April 15, 2013 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court Plaintiff-Appellant, v. JEFF HUPP;
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA. 1 The Downtown Soup Kitchen v. Anchorage Equal Rights Commission
David A. Cortman, AZ Bar No. 029490 Kevin G. Clarkson, AK Bar No. 8511149 Jonathan A. Scruggs, AZ Bar No. 030505 Brena, Bell & Clarkson, P.C. Ryan J. Tucker, AZ Bar No. 034382 810 N Street, Suite 100 Katherine
More information