Havens v. Johnson

Full title: DARRELL HAVENS, Plaintiff, v. DETECTIVE WILLIAM JOHNSON, individually and…

Court: United States District Court, D. Colorado

Date published: Jun 24, 2011

Civil Case No. 11-cv-00490-REB-BNB (D. Colo. Jun. 24, 2011)

Opinion

Civil Case No. 11-cv-00490-REB-BNB.

June 24, 2011

ORDER

BOYD BOLAND, Magistrate Judge

This matter arises on the following:

(1) Plaintiff's Motion to Amend Complaint [Doc. # 119, filed 5/27/2011] (the "Motion to Amend");

(2) [Arvada Defendants] Motion to Stay Proceedings Pending Determination of Entitlement to Qualified Immunity [Doc. # 83, filed 4/25/2011] ("Arvada's Motion to Stay");

(3) The State of Colorado's Motion for Protective Order and to Stay Discovery Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c)(1) [Doc. # 85, filed 4/26/2011] ("Colorado's Motion to Stay"); and

(4) Defendant Timothy Beals's Motion to Stay Discovery [Doc. # 97, filed 5/2/2011] ("Beals' Motion to Stay").

I held a hearing on the motions this afternoon and made rulings on the record, which are incorporated here. In summary and for the reasons stated on the record,

IT IS ORDERED:

(1) The Motion to Amend [Doc. # 119] is GRANTED. The Clerk of the Court is directed to accept for filing the Second Amended Complaint and Jury Demand [Doc. # 119-1].

(2) In view of my order allowing the plaintiff to amend his complaint, the following motions to dismiss are DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE:

(a) State of Colorado's Motion to Dismiss [Doc. # 70];

(b) Arvada Defendants' Motion to Dismiss [Doc. # 74];

(c) Lone Tree Defendants' Motion to Dismiss [Doc. # 87];

(d) United States' Motion to Dismiss [Doc. # 88];

(e) Beals's Motion to Dismiss [Doc. # 96];

(f) Denver Defendants' Motion to Dismiss [Doc. # 98];

(g) Mountain View Defendants' Motion to Dismiss [Doc. # 104]; and

(h) DEA Defendants' Motion to Dismiss [Doc. # 140].

(3) The defendants who have appeared may have to and including July 11, 2011, within which to answer or otherwise respond to the Second Amended Complaint.

(4) Arvada's Motion to Stay [Doc. # 83]; Colorado's Motion to Stay [Doc. # 85]; and Beals' Motion to Stay [Doc. # 97] are GRANTED. Discovery is STAYED pending a determination of the defendants' anticipated motions to dismiss, which are anticipated to raise issues of qualified immunity, Eleventh Amendment immunity, and sovereign immunity.

(5) Within ten days of any ruling by the district judge resolving motions to dismiss, the parties shall file a status report notifying me of the ruling, its impact on the case, and whether a scheduling conference should be set.