Wardlow v. Whiten

Wardlow v. Whiten

Plaintiff:	Larry Wardlow
Defendant:	Michael Whiten
Case Number:	2:2015cv00367
Filed:	February 27, 2015
Court:	US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama
Office:	Southern Office
County:	Jefferson
Presiding Judge:	John H England
Nature of Suit:	Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
March 29, 2017	Filing 42 MEMORANDUM OPINION - Based upon the foregoing, the defendants motion for summary judgment is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. There being no genuine issues of material fact as to the issue of municipal liability or qualified immunity as to Chief Roper, Chief Roper is entitled to summary judgment on all claims against him in his official capacity and on all claims against him in his individual capacity except Wardlows state law malicious prosecution claim in Count E. The remaining claims asserted against Whiten proceed because genuine issues of material fact preclude judgment as a matter of law. Signed by Magistrate Judge John H England, III on 3/29/2017. (KEK)
October 28, 2015	Filing 28 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER - Because the claim against Black Mark in the Amended Complaint does not relate-back to the original complaint, it is barred by the statute of limitations. Black Marks motion to dismiss, (doc. 8 ), is GRANTED. Signed by Magistrate Judge John H England, III on 10/28/2015. (KEK)

Date Filed

Document Text

March 29, 2017

Filing 42 MEMORANDUM OPINION - Based upon the foregoing, the defendants motion for summary judgment is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. There being no genuine issues of material fact as to the issue of municipal liability or qualified immunity as to Chief Roper, Chief Roper is entitled to summary judgment on all claims against him in his official capacity and on all claims against him in his individual capacity except Wardlows state law malicious prosecution claim in Count E. The remaining claims asserted against Whiten proceed because genuine issues of material fact preclude judgment as a matter of law. Signed by Magistrate Judge John H England, III on 3/29/2017. (KEK)

October 28, 2015

Filing 28 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER - Because the claim against Black Mark in the Amended Complaint does not relate-back to the original complaint, it is barred by the statute of limitations. Black Marks motion to dismiss, (doc. 8 ), is GRANTED. Signed by Magistrate Judge John H England, III on 10/28/2015. (KEK)

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 Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Wardlow v. Whiten
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Larry Wardlow
Represented By:	Leroy Maxwell, Jr
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 Whiten
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?