Manis et al v. Lawson et al, No. 2:2006cv06798 - Document 46 (E.D. La. 2008)
Court Description: ORDER AND REASONS denying 18 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Mary Ann Vial Lemmon on 10/1/2008. (caa, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Manis et al v. Lawson et al Doc. 46 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA BRYCE MANIS AND MADISON MANIS THROUGH THEIR NATURAL TUTRIX,, TONYA PLAISANCE CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO: 06-6798 ARTHUR LAWSON IN HIS CAPACITY AS CHIEF OF POLICE FOR THE CITY OF GRETNA, THE CITY OF GRETNA, AND OFFICER DOUGLASS ZEMLIK SECTION: "S" (3) ORDER AND REASONS IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the defendants’ motion for summary judgment is DENIED. (Document #18.) The plaintiffs have alleged the violation of a clearly established constitutional right, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, against Officer Douglass Zemlik in his individual capacity, and there are disputed issues of material fact as to whether the defendant's conduct was objectively reasonable in light of the legal rules clearly established at the time of the incident.1 1 At the hearing on the motion for summary judgment, the plaintiffs informed that they are not pursuing § 1983 claims against the City of Gretna and Arthur Lawson in his official capacity. Dockets.Justia.com Further, there are disputed issues of material fact as to the plaintiffs’ state-law negligence claims, as alleged in the complaint, against Officer Zemlik and Chief Lawson for their individual conduct and against the City of Gretna under a theory of respondeat superior. New Orleans, Louisiana, this _____ day of October, 2008. 1st ____________________________________ MARY ANN VIAL LEMMON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
