HENLEY v. HOUSING AUTHORITY OF NEW ORLEANS, 12-2687. (2013)
Court: District Court, E.D. Louisiana
Number: infdco20130626f05
Visitors: 7
Filed: Jun. 24, 2013
Latest Update: Jun. 24, 2013
Summary: ORDER LANCE M. AFRICK, District Judge. Before the Court is a motion 1 filed by plaintiff, Viola J. Henley, for a new trial under Rule 59 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Defendant, Housing Authority of New Orleans, opposes the motion. 2 This Court has considered the arguments raised by the parties in their memoranda, the record, and the law. For the reasons previously stated in this Court's order dismissing plaintiff's claims, IT IS ORDERED that the motion for a new trial is DENI
Summary: ORDER LANCE M. AFRICK, District Judge. Before the Court is a motion 1 filed by plaintiff, Viola J. Henley, for a new trial under Rule 59 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Defendant, Housing Authority of New Orleans, opposes the motion. 2 This Court has considered the arguments raised by the parties in their memoranda, the record, and the law. For the reasons previously stated in this Court's order dismissing plaintiff's claims, IT IS ORDERED that the motion for a new trial is DENIE..
More
ORDER
LANCE M. AFRICK, District Judge.
Before the Court is a motion1 filed by plaintiff, Viola J. Henley, for a new trial under Rule 59 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Defendant, Housing Authority of New Orleans, opposes the motion.2 This Court has considered the arguments raised by the parties in their memoranda, the record, and the law. For the reasons previously stated in this Court's order dismissing plaintiff's claims,
IT IS ORDERED that the motion for a new trial is DENIED.3
FootNotes
1. R. Doc. No. 20.
2. R. Doc. No. 21.
3. The Court notes that while the majority in Lane reversed the district court's decision for reasons other than the reliability of the hearsay, the dissent expressly agreed with the district court that the information in the sex offender registry was sufficiently reliable to support the hearing officer's decision. See Lane v. Fort Walton Beach Hous. Auth., 2013 WL 2150922, *10-*13 & n.3 (11th Cir. May 20, 2013) (Hill, J., dissenting) ("I believe that the majority should have applied the U.S. Pipe test to assess the reliability of the sex offender registry and call log before conceding that this hearsay could form the exclusive basis for the Hearing Officer's decision. I believe that the evidence passes this test, but the majority does not inquire.").
Source: Leagle
