Welch v. City of Albuquerque et al

Filing 269

ORDER by District Judge Kenneth J. Gonzales denying without prejudice 230 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Portions of Counts I, III, and IV and Memorandum in Support Thereof. Amended motion for partial summary judgment due 5/2/2017. (tah)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
TERYSA M. WELCH,
Plaintiff,
vs.

Civ. No. 11-700 KG/SCY

CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE, a New Mexico
Municipality; RAYMOND SCHULTZ,
ELIZABETH PAIZ, WILLIAM ROSEMAN, JOSEPH
HUDSON, DAVID HUBBARD, ROBERT SMITH,
CECIL KNOX, J. R. POTTER, KEVIN GAGNE, SUE
NEAL, and JOHN DOES I-V, Individually and as
agents and employees of the City of Albuquerque,
Defendants.
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court upon Defendants’ Motion for Partial Summary
Judgment on Portions of Counts I, III, and IV and Memorandum in Support Thereof (Motion for
Partial Summary Judgment), filed on November 30, 2016. (Doc. 230). Plaintiff filed a response
on January 20, 2017, and Defendants filed a reply on February 10, 2017. (Docs. 242 and 252).
The Court recently filed a Memorandum Opinion and Order granting in part and denying
in part Individual Defendants [sic] Motion for Summary Judgment Addressing Counts I, III, and
IV and Memorandum in Support Thereof (Doc. 232). See (Doc. 267). Because the Court’s
ruling affects Counts I, III, and IV of the Second Amended Complaint, the subject of the Motion
for Partial Summary Judgment, the Court ORDERS that
1. Defendants’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Portions of Counts I, III, and
IV and Memorandum in Support Thereof (Doc. 230) is denied without prejudice to Defendants

filing an amended motion for partial summary judgment which takes into account the Court’s
decision in its Memorandum Opinion and Order (Doc. 267);
2. Defendants will file any such amended motion for partial summary judgment no later
than four weeks from the date of the entry of this Order; and
3. the parties will brief the amended motion for partial summary judgment in accordance
with the Local Rules and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

_______________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2