Howard et al v. Smith County, Tennessee et al

Filing 43

ORDER: For the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum, the Court hereby enters the following rulings: (1) Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 17 is GRANTED with respect to Plaintiffs' federal claims, and Plaintiffs' Fou rth and Fourteenth Amendment claims under the United States Constitution are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; (2) Plaintiffs' state law claims are REMANDED to the Smith County Circuit Court; and (3) In accordance with these rulings, the Clerk is directed to enter a Judgment in a separate document pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58. It is SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Kevin H. Sharp on 9/19/11. (tmw)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NORTHEASTERN DIVISION BETINA CARVER HOWARD a/k/a TINA HOWARD and husband, ANTHONY HOWARD, ) ) ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) SMITH COUNTY, TENNESSEE, ) RONNIE LANKFORD, individually and ) in his official capacity as Sheriff of Smith ) County, Tennessee; CHRIS ) HUDDLESTON, individually and in his ) official capacity as an employee of the ) Smith County Sheriff’s Department, ) ) Defendants. ) No. 2:10-0009 Judge Sharp ORDER For the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum, the Court hereby enters the following rulings: (1) Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket No. 17) is GRANTED with respect to Plaintiffs’ federal claims, and Plaintiffs’ Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment claims under the United States Constitution are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; (2) Plaintiffs’ state law claims are REMANDED to the Smith County Circuit Court; and (3) In accordance with these rulings, the Clerk is directed to enter a Judgment in a separate document pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58. It is SO ORDERED. ____________________________________ KEVIN H. SHARP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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?