Howell v. A.M. Moore et al, No. 3:2016cv00649 - Document 17 (E.D. Va. 2017)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM ORDER. The Court ADOPTS the findings the findings and recommendations set forth in the R&R as to all sections except Section III.D., 13 ; ADOPTS the findings and recommendations set forth in the R&R as to Section III.D as modified by this Memorandum Order; OVERRULES the Defendants' objection asking the Court to dismiss Count 1, subpart (i), (ii) and (iv), Count III and Count IV of the Amended Complaint 14 ; GRANTS IN PART the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, 5 ; DISMISSES C ount II of the Amended Complaint; DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Count IV of the Amended Complaint; DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE the County and Colonel Dupuis as defendants. Defendants shall file an answer to the remaining counts in Howell's Amended Complaint no later than October 13, 2017. Signed by District Judge M. Hannah Lauck on 09/30/2017. (tjoh, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Howell v. A.M. Moore et al Doc. 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division COREY A. HOWELL, Plaintiff, V. Civil Action No. 3;I6cv649 ADAM M. MOORE, et aL, Defendants. MEMORANDUM ORDER Plaintiff Corey A. Howell brings this action against five officers in the Chesterfield County Police Department' intheir individual and official capacities, Chesterfield County Police Department Chief of Police Colonel Thierry G. Dupuis ("Colonel Dupuis") in his individual and official capacity, and Chesterfield County, Virginia ("the County") (collectively, the "Defendants"). Howell brings his action pursuant to42U.S.C. § 1983^ and Virginia state law, ' The five officers are: (1) Officer Adam M. Moore; (2) Sergeant Russell M. Granderson; (3) Sergeant Gary T. Bailey; (4) Officer Sean D. Retter; and, (5) Sergeant Matthew R. Dunn, (collectively, the "Defendant Officers"). Section 1983 provides a private right of action for a violation of constitutional rights by persons acting under the color of state law: Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress .... 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
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.
