Avery v. Hoover, Alabama, City of et al
| Tieshka Avery |
| Hoover, Alabama, City of, Hoover Police Department, Christopher Bryant, Hoover City Board of Education, Don Hulin and Joshua Whited |
| 2:2013cv00826 |
| May 2, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama |
| Southern Office |
| Jefferson |
| Madeline H Haikala |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
82
MEMORANDUM OPINION - For the reasons discussed above, the Court GRANTS the defendants motions to dismisses for failure to state a claim the deliberate indifference to medical needs claim in Count III of the second amended complaint and the claims und er the ADA in Counts IV and V of the second amended complaint. The Court DENIES the motions to dismiss Ms. Averys § 1983 excessive force claim against Officer Bryant and the City of Hoover and the assault and battery claim against Officer Bryant . The Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Mr. Whiteds motion to dismiss. The Court DISMISSES Ms. Averys official-capacity claim against Mr. Whited, but her assault and battery claim against him in his individual capacity shall proceed. The Court DISMISSES all claims against Mr. Hulin. The Court directs the clerk to please term docs 42, 44, 46, 48, and 49. Signed by Judge Madeline Hughes Haikala on 7/17/2015. (KEK)
|
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 Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
