Frank v. Parnell, 1:18-CV-00978. (2019)
Court: District Court, W.D. Louisiana
Number: infdco20190613847
Visitors: 10
Filed: Jun. 10, 2019
Latest Update: Jun. 10, 2019
Summary: JUDGMENT DEE D. DRELL , District Judge . For the reasons contained in the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge previously filed herein, noting the absence of objections thereto, and concurring with the Magistrate Judge's findings under the applicable law; IT IS ORDERED that the "Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim" (Doc. 7) is GRANTED IN PART and the federal claims against the City and those against Parnell in his official capacity as well as those which fail to st
Summary: JUDGMENT DEE D. DRELL , District Judge . For the reasons contained in the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge previously filed herein, noting the absence of objections thereto, and concurring with the Magistrate Judge's findings under the applicable law; IT IS ORDERED that the "Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim" (Doc. 7) is GRANTED IN PART and the federal claims against the City and those against Parnell in his official capacity as well as those which fail to sta..
More
JUDGMENT
DEE D. DRELL, District Judge.
For the reasons contained in the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge previously filed herein, noting the absence of objections thereto, and concurring with the Magistrate Judge's findings under the applicable law;
IT IS ORDERED that the "Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim" (Doc. 7) is GRANTED IN PART and the federal claims against the City and those against Parnell in his official capacity as well as those which fail to state plausible claims for relief against the City and Parnell under § 1983 and state law are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
As the City and Parnell are not entitled to discretionary immunity for negligent conduct at the operational level and because the City can be vicariously liable under state law for the actions of its employees, their motion is DENIED IN PART.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to stay discovery (Doc. 7) filed by the City and Parnell is DENIED AS MOOT.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Plaintiffs' official capacity claims under §1983 against Sheriff Anderson, Spillman, and Alexander are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
Source: Leagle
