Jernigan v. Richard et al
ORDER Granting in part, and denying in part, the Gilbert Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment. (Doc. 96 ). Granting in part, and denying in part, Defendant Kyle Richard's Motion for Summary Judgment. (Doc. 145 ). Granting in part and d enying in part the Motion for Partial Summary Judgment by Rachel Jernigan. (Doc. 152 ). The Court grants Plaintiff's request to Disregard the Town Defendant's Response. (Doc. 172 ). A copy of this Order on summary judgment is to be transm itted to the Department of Justice's Office of Professional Responsibility ("OPR"). The Court requests the OPR to determine independently whether SA Richard's testimony at (1) Ms. Jernigan's hearing on her motion for new tria l on May 12-13, 2004, (2) his declaration under penalty of perjury dated November 30, 2010 and filed in this matter at Doc. 145-2, Ex. A, specifically 12; and (3) his declaration under penalty of perjury dated January 24, 2011 and filed in this mat ter at Doc 162-2, specifically 12, comply with the ethical standards of the Department of Justice. The Court further refers to the OPR the question whether additional non-administrative action is merited against SA Richard in light of his sworn stat ements. This second question is referred to the OPR in light of the recusal by the United States Attorney for the District of Arizona from this matter and the representation of SA Richard by the United States Attorney for the Central District of Cal ifornia. Should a further referral of this question by the OPR be necessary to implement the Court's referral, nothing about this Court's referral prevents such an additional referral. Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 1/11/2012. (NOTE: See PDF for full details)(KMG)
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?