T.P.R. v. Montgomery Public Schools et al(MAG+)
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|June 17, 2010
ORDER; 1. The objections 44 are OVERRULED; 2. The Recommendation 43 is ADOPTED; This action is DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C.§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). An appropriate judgment will be entered. Signed by Honorable William Keith Watkins on 6/17/2010. (jg, )
|April 2, 2009
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS that defendants' 8 MOTION to Dismiss the plaintiff's IDEA claims should be GRANTED; that said motion to dismiss the claims against the Montgomery Public Schools and the individual defendants in their official ca pacities should be GRANTED; that to the extent the plaintiff asserts that the defendants violated the Due Process Clause by failing to follow their own regulations and state law, the defendants' motion to dismiss should be GRANTED; that to the e xtent the plaintiff asserts that the defendants violated the Due Process Clause by failing to provide adequate notice or give T.P.R. an opportunity to dispute the charges against him prior to his suspension and de facto expulsion, the defendants' ; motion to dismiss should be DENIED; that the claims that defendants Washington, Everage, Johnson, LaCoste, Robinson, Thomas, Dilworth, and Price in their individual capacities violated the Due Process Clause by failing to provide adequate notice or give T.P.R. an opportunity to dispute the charges against him prior to his suspension and defacto expulsion shall proceed; Objections to R&R due by 4/15/2009. Signed by Honorable Charles S. Coody on 4/2/2009. (cc, )
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 Alabama Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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?