Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)

06-487 - W.E.T. et al v. MITCHELL et al

Download Files


Document in Context
06-487 - W.E.T. et al v. MITCHELL et al
September 14, 2007
PDF | More
NIED IN PART, as set forth; As to Defendants Denlinger and the Durham Public School Board's (the "DPS Board") Motion to Dismiss [Document # 9] the Court concludes that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss the claims against Denlinger in her official and individual capacities is GRANTED. Accordingly, all of Plaintiffs' claims against Denlinger are dismissed with prejudice. In addition, as to the DPS Board, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED with respect to: (1) Plaintiff W.E.T.'s § 1983 claim against the DPS Board for failure to train or properly supervise; (2) Plaintiffs W. Tabb and D. Tabb's individual claims against the DPS Board; (3) Plaintiffs' direct claim of negligence against the DPS Board; and (4) Plaintiffs' request for punitive damages. Each of these claims are therefore being DISMISSED with prejudice. However, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss as to the DPS Board is DENIED with respect to Plaintiff W.E.T.'s state law claims of false imprisonment, intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress, assault, battery, and negligence on the basis of respondent superior, because Plaintiffs have alleged in the Complaint that the DPS Board waived its governmental immunity pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 115C-42. The Court therefore concludes that Plaintiffs' allegations in this respect are sufficient to withstand Defendants' motion to dismiss as to these state law claims. (Welch, Kelly)ORDER signed by Judge JAMES A. BEATY JR. on 9/14/07, for the reasons discussed in the Memorandum Opinion filed contemporaneously herewith, the Court concludes that Defendant Mitchell's Motion to Dismiss [Document #16] is GRANTED IN PART AND DE
January 10, 2008
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER signed by CHIEF JUDGE JAMES A. BEATY, JR on 1/10/08, for the reasons discussed, Defendant Mitchell's second Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff W.E.T.'s § 1983 claim against her in her official capacity is GRANTED, and that claim is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice. FURTHER that Defendant Mitchell's second Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff W.E.T.'s § 1983 claim against her in her individual capacity on the basis of qualified immunity is DENIED. FINALLY, that Mitchell's motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is DENIED.(Welch, Kelly)