Doe 1 et al v. Montgomery County Board of Education et al, No. 8:2021cv00356 - Document 312 (D. Md. 2023)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Peter J. Messitte on 7/20/2023. (hmls, Deputy Clerk)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Doe 1 et al v. Montgomery County Board of Education et al Doc. 312 Dockets.Justia.com without further delay. The claimed injuries to Plaintiffs clearly militate against issuance of a stay. 4. Public interest Finally, Defendants assert that the public has an important interest in the proper application of qualified immunity. Accepting that to be so, is the public interest in resolving with appropriate dispatch the alleged brutal treatment of its children any less? Again: Because Sullivan, Crouse, and Wallich will in any event be held to answer with respect to the negligence claims regardless of the outcome of Defendants' appeal, the public interest in properly applying immunity is not a consideration at best and in no sense weighs in favor of staying this lawsuit. I. CONCLUSION The Court concludes that the traditional factors, on balance, do not justify a stay here. Accordingly, Defendants' Motion to Stay Proceedings Pending Interlocutory Appeal (EOF No. 307) is DENIED. A separate Order will ISSUE. ; July 2023 ETERJ. MESSITTE
]]>
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.
