Burrle v. Stutes et al

Filing 22

RULE 7(a) HEIGHTENED PLEADING REVIEW. Signed by Magistrate Judge Patrick J Hanna on 5/19/2011. (crt,Dauterive, C)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
LAFAYETTE DIVISION
JARRELL BURRLE

CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-1716

VERSUS

JUDGE DOHERTY

SONNY STUTES, ET AL

MAGISTRATE JUDGE HANNA

RULE 7(a) HEIGHTENED PLEADING REVIEW
In this §1983 civil rights suit, plaintiff has sued defendants in their official and
individual capacities. In their answers, defendants plead qualified immunity. The
undersigned has therefore conducted an evaluation of plaintiffs complaint to determine
whether it meets the applicable heightened pleading requirement. See Schultea v. Wood,
47 F.3d 1427, (5 th Cir. 1995); Baker v. Putnal, 75 F.3d 190, 195 (5th Cir. 1996). After
review, the undersigned concludes plaintiffs have “supported [their] claims with
sufficient precision and factual specificity to raise a genuine issue as to the illegality of
defendants’ conduct at the time of the alleged acts.” Schultea, 47 F.3d at 1434. Although
the court may later determine the facts in favor of defendants, the sole issue presented
here is whether plaintiffs have satisfied the heightened pleading requirement of Shultea,
which the undersigned concludes they have. Thus, no order limiting discovery under
Schultea is appropriate.
Signed at Lafayette, Louisiana on this 19 th day of May, 2011.