Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Austin v. Oakes

United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Lafayette Division

July 21, 2017

MARK AUSTIN
v.
OFFICER OAKES, ET AL

         SECTION P

          PATRICK HANNA JUDGE.

          MEMORANDUM ORDER

          PATRICK J. HANNA UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

         Pro se plaintiff Mark Austin, proceeding in forma pauperis, filed the instant civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983 on May 8, 2017. Plaintiff is incarcerated at the Lafayette Parish Correctional Center (LPCC), in Lafayette, Louisiana. He complains that he was falsely arrested by Officers Oakes and Eaton of the Lafayette Police Department on May 17, 2016. He sues Officer Oakes, Officer Eaton, Officer Credeur, Police Department of Lafayette and the City of Lafayette. This complaint has been referred to the undersigned for review, report, and recommendation in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. §636 and the standing orders of the court.

         Amend Order

         1. Rule 8 Considerations

         Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure does not require explicit detail, but it does require a plaintiff to allege specific facts which support the conclusion that his constitutional rights were violated by each person who is named as a defendant. This conclusion must be supported by specific factual allegations stating the following:

(1) the name(s) of each person who allegedly violated plaintiff's constitutional rights;
(2) a description of what actually occurred or what each defendant did to violate plaintiff's rights;
(3) the place and date(s) that each event occurred; and
(4) a description of the alleged injury sustained as a result of the alleged violation.

         Plaintiff should amend his complaint to provide the information required by Rule 8 with respect to EACH plaintiff.

         2. Heck v. Humphrey and Wallace v. Kato considerations

         Plaintiff contests the legality of his arrest and continued imprisonment. It is presumed that plaintiff is a pre-trial detainee and that the complained of prosecution is on-going. However, plaintiff should amend to clarify whether there has been an adjudication of the criminal charges that comprise the basis of this complaint. Of course, if plaintiff is ultimately convicted of these now pending charges, he may not be entitled to seek damages for the wrongful arrest, imprisonment, and prosecution until such time as ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.