Jones-Bey v. Dist. of Columbia

Full title: AMAALA JONES-BEY, et al., Plaintiffs, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al.…

Court: United States District Court, District of Columbia

Date published: Jul 22, 2024

1:21-cv-02674 (JMC) (D.D.C. Jul. 22, 2024)

Opinion

1:21-cv-02674 (JMC)

07-22-2024

AMAALA JONES-BEY, et al., Plaintiffs, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al., Defendants.

JIA M. COBB, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

ORDER

JIA M. COBB, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

As stated on the record on July 16, 2024, and for the reasons stated in the accompanying memorandum opinion, it is hereby ORDERED that

The District of Columbia's motion to dismiss, ECF 45, is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The motion is GRANTED with respect to the following: Plaintiff Jones-Bey's Fourth Amendment claim (pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983) and claims for battery, assault, negligence per se (including “statutory battery”), negligent infliction of emotional distress, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and negligent hiring. The motion is DENIED with respect to the following claims: Plaintiff Jones-Bey's Fifth Amendment (pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983) and negligent training, supervision, and retention claims, as well as Plaintiff Jones-Bey's and Plaintiff Intervenor Hylton's negligence claims. It is further

ORDERED that Defendants Al-Shrawi, Novick, and Tejera's motion to dismiss, ECF 60, is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The motion is GRANTED with respect to the following: Plaintiff Jones-Bey's Fourth Amendment claim (pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983) and claims for battery, assault, negligence, negligence per se (including “statutory battery”), negligent infliction of emotional distress, and intentional infliction of emotional distress, as well as Plaintiff Intervenor Hylton's negligence claim. The motion is DENIED with respect to the following claims: Plaintiff Jones-Bey's and Plaintiff Intervenor Hylton's Fifth Amendment claims (pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983).

ORDERED that Defendant Sutton's motion to dismiss, ECF 61, is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The motion is GRANTED with respect to the following: Plaintiff Jones-Bey's Fourth Amendment claim (pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983) and claims for battery, assault, negligence, negligence per se (including “statutory battery”), negligent infliction of emotional distress, and intentional infliction of emotional distress, as well as Plaintiff Intervenor Hylton's negligence claim. The motion is DENIED with respect to the following claims: Plaintiff Jones-Bey's and Plaintiff Intervenor Hylton's Fifth Amendment claims (pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983).

SO ORDERED.