PIERCE EL-BEY v. CITY OF THOMASVILLE
Plaintiff: TORNELLO FONTAINE PIERCE EL-BEY
Defendant: NC DIVISION OF MOTOR VEHICLE, MICHAEL/MIKE ROBERTSON, CITY OF THOMASVILLE POLICE DEPT, CITY OF THOMASVILLE, WAYNE L. MICHAEL, MARLENE HAMMOND and C.S. LEONARD
Case Number: 1:2011cv00413
Filed: May 24, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina
Office: NCMD Office
County: Guilford
Presiding Judge: UNASSIGNED
Presiding Judge: WALLACE W. DIXON
Nature of Suit: Constitutionality of State Statutes
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2201
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
September 30, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 79 ORDER signed by CHIEF JUDGE WILLIAM L. OSTEEN JR. on 9/30/2013; that the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation (Doc. 56 ) is ADOPTED. FURTHER that the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants NC Division of Motor Vehicle and Mike Roberts on (Doc. 9 ) is GRANTED, that the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants Marlene Hammond and Wayne L. Michael (Doc. 17 ) is GRANTED, and that the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants City of Thomasville, the City of Thomasville Police Department, and C.S. Leonard (Doc. 24 ) is GRANTED with the sole exception that additional briefing is allowed as to Plaintiff's claim of a Fourth Amendment violation based upon Defendant Leonard's search of Plaintiff's vehicle. FURTHER that Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 37 ) and Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. 39 ) are DENIED. (Sheets, Jamie)
March 30, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 56 MEMORANDUM OPINION, ORDER AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE signed by MAG/JUDGE JOI ELIZABETH PEAKE on 3/30/2012, RECOMMENDING that the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants North Carolina DMV and Mike Robertson [Doc. # 9 ] be GRAN TED; that the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants Hammond and Michael [Doc. # 17 ] be GRANTED; and that the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants City of Thomasville, the Thomasville Police Department, and C.S. Leonard [Doc. # 24 ], be GRANTED with the sole exception that additional briefing should be allowed as to Plaintiff's claim of a Fourth Amendment violation based upon Defendant Leonard's search of Plaintiff's vehicle. ORDERING that within twenty-one (21) days of the date of this Order, Defendants City of Thomasville and C.S. Leonard file a supplemental brief with respect to Plaintiff's claim of a Fourth Amendment violation based upon Defendant Leonard's search of Plaintiff's vehicle, with any Response by Plaintiff filed within twenty-one (21) days thereafter. When the briefing is completed, this matter should be referred to the undersigned for further consideration of the Motion to Dismiss as to this claim. FURTHER RECOMMENDING that Plaintiff 9;s Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. # 37 ] and Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [Doc. # 39 ] be DENIED. ORDERING that the remaining motions [Doc. # 13 , # 14 , # 19 , # 22 , # 23 , # 29 , # 30 , # 31 , # 33 , # 34 , # 35 , # 42 , # 44 , # 45 , # 49 , # 50 , # 53 ] are DENIED. (Lloyd, Donna)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the North Carolina Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: PIERCE EL-BEY v. CITY OF THOMASVILLE
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: NC DIVISION OF MOTOR VEHICLE
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: MICHAEL/MIKE ROBERTSON
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: CITY OF THOMASVILLE POLICE DEPT
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: CITY OF THOMASVILLE
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: WAYNE L. MICHAEL
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: MARLENE HAMMOND
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: C.S. LEONARD
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: TORNELLO FONTAINE PIERCE EL-BEY
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?