Grayson v. Thomas et al (DEATH PENALTY)

Plaintiff: Carey Dale Grayson
Defendant: Kim Tobias Thomas and Anthony Patterson
Case Number: 2:2012cv00316
Filed: April 6, 2012
Court: Alabama Middle District Court
Office: Montgomery Office
County: Escambia
Referring Judge: Charles S. Coody
Presiding Judge: Myron H. Thompson
Nature of Suit: Death Penalty
Cause of Action: 42:1983
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed#Document Text
February 28, 2017 239 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: it is ORDERED that: 1. Judgment is entered in Defendants favor on Grayson's Fourteenth Amendment equal protection claim. 2. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b), and the court's finding that there is no just reason for delay, a Final Judgment in Defendants' favor on all claims asserted by Plaintiff Carey Dale Grayson will be entered contemporaneously with this Memorandum Opinion and Order. 3. This is a FINAL and APPEALABLE Order as to Plaintiff Carey Dale Grayson. Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on 2/28/2017. (kh, )
October 31, 2016 192 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: ORDERED that: 1. Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiffs' Eighth Amendment claims (Doc. # 127 ) is GRANTED. 2. Judgment is entered in Defendants' favor on the Eighth Amendment claims of Plai ntiffs Carey Dale Grayson, Demetrius Frazier, David Lee Roberts, Robin Dion Myers, and Gregory Hunt. 3. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b), and the court's finding that there is no just reason for delay, a Final Judgment in Defend ants' favor on all claims asserted by Demetrius Frazier, David Lee Roberts, Robin Dion Myers, and Gregory Hunt will be entered contemporaneously with this Memorandum Opinion and Order. 4. All claims asserted by Plaintiffs Frazier, Roberts, Myers , and Hunt against Defendants having been resolved, the actions filed by Demetrius Frazier (2:13- cv-0781-WKW), David Lee Roberts (2:14-cv-1028-WKW), Robin Dion Myer (2:14- v-1029-WKW), and Gregory Hunt (2:14-cv-1030-WKW) are DISMISSED. 5. There bein g no just reason for delay, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b), this is a final and appealable Order as to Plaintiffs Demetrius Frazier, David Lee Roberts, Robin Dion Myers, and Gregory Hunt. 6. Grayson's Fourteenth Amendment claim remains pending. Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on 10/31/2016. (kh, ) Modified on 10/31/2016 to correct the text. (kh, ).
December 22, 2015 93 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: it is ORDERED that Brooks's Emergency 81 Motion to Stay Execution is DENIED. Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on 12/22/2015. (wcl, )
July 24, 2015 47 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDERED as follows:1. The stay of this proceeding by order dated March 19, 2015 (Doc. # 41 )is LIFTED. 2. Grayson shall FILE an amended complaint that complies with Local Rule 15.1, on or before August 18, 2015, to correct the deficiency outlined ab ove.Failure to do so will result in dismissal of Grayson's Eighth Amendment claim.3. The States renewed motion to dismiss (Doc. # 45 ) is DENIED with LEAVE TO REFILE following the filing of Grayson's amended complaint. The State shall answ er or otherwise respond to Grayson's amended complaint no later than fourteen (14) days from the date it is filed.. Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on 7/24/2015. (kh, ) Modified on 7/24/2015 (kh, ). Modified on 7/24/2015 to correct the docket text. (kh, ).
March 19, 2015 41 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER as follows: 1. This proceeding is STAYED generally. 2. 2. Within fourteen (14) days from the Supreme Courts decision in Glossip, the parties shall jointly, if possible, or individually, if not, file a statement or appropriate motion that inform s the court of their respective positions on the issues in this case in view of the Glossip decision as further set out in the order. 3. The States Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 40 ) is DENIED with LEAVE to REFILE following the Supreme Courts decision in Glossip. Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on 3/19/2015. (dmn, )
January 16, 2015 30 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE, in writing, as to why 28 Motion for Leave to amend complaint should not be granted; Show Cause Response due by 1/23/2015. Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on 1/16/15. (djy, )

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

Search for this case: Grayson v. Thomas et al (DEATH PENALTY)
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Carey Dale Grayson
Represented By: John Anthony Palombi
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Kim Tobias Thomas
Represented By: James Clayton Crenshaw
Represented By: Stephanie Elizabeth Reiland
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Anthony Patterson
Represented By: James Clayton Crenshaw
Represented By: Stephanie Elizabeth Reiland
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 [ 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?