From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brooks v. Menifee

United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Alexandria Division
Mar 4, 2010
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:07-cv-00131 (W.D. La. Mar. 4, 2010)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:07-cv-00131.

March 4, 2010


ORDER


For written reasons given by separate ruling on this date, the Court hereby enters the following dispositions:

(1) the Motion to Dismiss and for Summary Judgment (Doc. 31) filed by the defendants, Fredrick Menifee et al., is DENIED;
(2) the Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 37) filed by the plaintiff, Love Altonio Brooks ("Mr. Brooks") is DENIED; and
(3) the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 42) issued by the magistrate judge will be ADOPTED IN PART, as specified in the Court's ruling.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, because the defense of prescription has not been waived, and because the issue of whether state tolling provisions or the federal equitable tolling doctrine are applicable in this case has not been resolved, the Court will hold an evidentiary hearing limited to consideration of that issue on April 16, 2010, at 11:00 A.M. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Brooks will be present at this hearing.


Summaries of

Brooks v. Menifee

United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Alexandria Division
Mar 4, 2010
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:07-cv-00131 (W.D. La. Mar. 4, 2010)
Case details for

Brooks v. Menifee

Case Details

Full title:LOVE ALTONIO BROOKS v. WARDEN FREDRICK MENIFEE, et al

Court:United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Alexandria Division

Date published: Mar 4, 2010

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:07-cv-00131 (W.D. La. Mar. 4, 2010)

Citing Cases

Wiley v. Cooley

A distinction has been drawn between "intermittent exposure to smoke during bus rides" as "sporadic and…

Jiles v. McCain

This Court has drawn a distinction between “intermittent exposure to smoke during bus rides” as “sporadic and…