Beckett v. Serpas et al, No. 2:2012cv00910 - Document 30 (E.D. La. 2012)
Court Description: ORDER and REASONS denying 6 Motion to Dismiss Case, as stated within document. Signed by Judge Kurt D. Engelhardt on 8/24/2012. (cab) Modified on 8/24/2012 to edit document type (cab).
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Beckett v. Serpas et al Doc. 30 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA CATHERINE BECKETT CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO. 12-910 RONAL W. SERPAS, et al. SECTION "N ORDER AND REASONS Presently before the Court is Defendants’ “Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6)” (Rec. Doc. 6). On the showing made, and for essentially the reasons stated in Plaintiff’s opposition memorandum (Rec. Doc. 11), IT IS ORDERED that Defendants’ motion is DENIED. This ruling is without prejudice, however, to Defendants’ right to file a properly supported motion for summary judgment, pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, regarding Plaintiff’s claims. To prevail against such a motion, Plaintiff would not be able to simply rely on the allegations of her complaint.1 Rather, she would have to present evidence sufficient to demonstrate the existence of a genuine issue of material 1 For instance, Plaintiff alleges that the stated reasons for her termination (as set forth in Defendant Serpas’ November 17, 2011 letter) “were mere pretext as defendant Serpas was well aware that plaintiff had violated none of [the specified New Orleans Police Department rules] nor any other rules of the NOPD.” See Complaint, Rec. Doc. 1, ¶23. Plaintiff also avers that “Defendant Serpas maintained the employment of other NOPD officers who had actually violated rules of the NOPD because those officers testified favorably to federal prosecutors.” Id. at ¶25. 1 Dockets.Justia.com fact relative to a violation of her constitutional rights, and the objective unreasonableness of Defendant Serpas’ conduct in light of law that was clearly established at the time. New Orleans, Louisiana, this 24th day of August 2012. _________________________________ KURT D. ENGELHARDT 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.
