DuBois v. Henderson County Board of Education et al

Filing 20

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 12 Motion to Dismiss; accepting 19 Memorandum and Recommendations. Signed by District Judge Martin Reidinger on 01/29/14. (emw)

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
ASHEVILLE DIVISION
CIVIL CASE NO. 1:13-cv-00131-MR-DLH

ANDRE DUBOIS,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
)
HENDERSON COUNT Y BOARD
)
OF EDUCATION, d/b/a HENDERSON )
COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS, and
)
STEPHEN PAGE, individually and
)
officially,
)
)
Defendants.
)
______________________________ )

ORDER

THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Defendants’ Motion to
Dismiss [Doc. 12] and the Magistrate Judge’s Memorandum and
Recommendation [Doc. 19] regarding the disposition of that motion.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and the standing Orders of
Designation of this Court, the Honorable Dennis L. Howell, United States
Magistrate Judge, was designated to consider the motion to dismiss and to
submit a recommendation for its disposition.

On January 6, 2014, the Magistrate Judge filed a Memorandum and
Recommendation in this case containing proposed conclusions of law in
support of a recommendation regarding the Defendants’ Motion. [Doc. 19].
The parties were advised that any objections to the Magistrate Judge’s
Memorandum and Recommendation were to be filed in writing within
fourteen (14) days of service. The period within which to file objections has
expired,

and

no

written

objections

to

the

Memorandum

and

Recommendation have been filed.
After a careful review of the Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation,
the Court finds that the proposed conclusions of law are consistent with
current case law. Accordingly, the Court hereby accepts the Magistrate
Judge’s Recommendation that the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss should
be granted in part and denied in part.

ORDER
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Memorandum and
Recommendation [Doc. 19] is ACCEPTED, and the Defendants’ Motion to
Dismiss [Doc. 12] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as
follows:

2

(1)

The Defendants’ Motion is GRANTED with respect to Plaintiff’s
§ 1983 claim asserted against Defendant Page in his official
capacity; Plaintiff’s state law claims asserted against Defendant
Henderson

County

Board

of

Education;

and

Plaintiff’s

negligence claim asserted against Defendant Page in his
individual capacity, and these claims are hereby DISMISSED;
(2)

The Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is DENIED with respect to
Plaintiff’s remaining claims.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Defendants shall file an Answer
to the Plaintiff’s Complaint within fourteen (14) days of the entry of this
Order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

3