Seivers v. Minneapolis, City of et al

Filing 110

ORDER adopting the verdict of the jury(Written Opinion). Signed by Senior Judge David S. Doty on 6/9/2011. (PJM)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Civil No. 09-816(DSD/SER) Devon Seivers, Plaintiff, ORDER v. City of Minneapolis, Minneapolis Police Officers James Bulleigh (Badge #0860) and Daniel Lysholm (Badge #4309), both individually and officially, John Does and other unnamed Police Officers, and Timothy Dolan, Chief of Minneapolis Police, personally and individually, Defendants. This action arises out of the arrest of plaintiff Devon Seivers on September 9, 2006. Seivers filed a nine-count amended complaint against defendants City of Minneapolis, James Bulleigh, Daniel Lysholm, John Does, other unnamed police officers and Timothy Dolan. See ECF No. 42. On January 25, 2011, the court granted partial summary judgment on counts II through IX in favor of defendants. See ECF No. 61. As a result, no claims remained against the City or Dolan. The remaining count of excessive force against Bulleigh and Lysholm proceeded to jury trial from June 6–9, 2011. After plaintiff rested, the parties agreed to dismiss the Does, other unnamed police officers and Dolan. See ECF No. 107. Lysholm moved for judgment as a matter of law. Bulleigh and The court granted the motion as to Lysholm and took the motion under advisement as to Bulleigh. Id. The jury returned a verdict that Bulleigh did not use excessive force on plaintiff on or about September 9, 2006. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The court adopts the verdict of the jury; 2. The oral motion for judgment as a matter of law as to Bulleigh is moot; and 3. The remaining claim against defendant Bulleigh is dismissed with prejudice. LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY. Dated: June 9, 2011 s/David S. Doty David S. Doty, Judge United States District Court 2

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?