Faulk v. Duplantis et al

Filing 19

ORDER granting 15 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim/For Lack of Jurisdiction. Party Municipal Fire & Police Civil Service, Office of State Examiner, State of Louisiana, Melinda Livingston dismissed. Signed by Judge Jay C. Zainey on 1/18/13. (Reference: 12-1714, 12-1717)(jrc, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
KYLE FAULK & MILTON WOLFE,
JR.

CIVIL ACTION

VERSUS

NO: 12-1714 C/W
12-1717

TODD M. DUPLANTIS, ET AL.

SECTION: "A" (3)

ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION
[REF: ALL CASES]
Local Rule 7.5 of the Eastern District of Louisiana requires
that memoranda in opposition to a motion be filed eight days
prior to the noticed submission date of the motion.

No

memorandum in opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Rec.
Doc. 15), submitted for consideration on January 16, 2013, has
been submitted.

Accordingly, this motion is deemed to be

unopposed, and, further, it appearing to the Court that the
motion has merit,1
1

The Court can envision no good faith arguments that
Plaintiffs could have raised in opposition to Defendants’ motion.
The claims against the State of Louisiana Municipal Fire & Police
Civil Service Office of State Examiner and against Melinda
Livingston in her official capacity are clearly barred by
Eleventh Amendment immunity. As for the claims against Ms.
Livingston individually, the Court agrees that the complaint
fails to allege facts sufficient to state a claim against her.
And assuming arguendo that the complaint does state a claim
against Ms. Livingston personally, then the Court agrees that she

1

Accordingly;
IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss (Rec. Doc. 15)
filed by defendant Melinda Livingston and the State of Louisiana
Municipal Fire & Police Civil Service Office of State Examiner is
GRANTED.

Plaintiffs’ complaint is dismissed as to these

defendants.
A motion for reconsideration of this order based on the
appropriate Federal Rule of Civil Procedure, if any, must be
filed within ten (10) days.

The motion must be accompanied by an

opposition memorandum to the original motion.

Because such a

motion would not have been necessary had a timely opposition
memorandum been filed, the costs incurred in connection with the
motion, including attorney's fees, may be assessed against the
party moving for reconsideration.
January 18, 2013

JAY C. ZAINEY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

would be entitled to qualified immunity.

2