6th Cir. (Ky.): GREGORY V. CITY OF LOUISVILLE, ET AL. (WD, Louisville; 4/11/2006)

Gregory v. Cty of Louisville
Torts: Civil rights action under 42 USC 1983
Western District of Kentucky at Louisville
06a0127p.06
4/11/2006

CLAY, Circuit Judge. Plaintiff, William Thomas Gregory, and Defendants cross appeal March 29, 2004 and June 22, 2004 orders entered by the United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky which ruled on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment in this action by Plaintiff for violations of his civil rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and various state laws. The orders below dismissed Plaintiff’s claims entirely against the municipal and supervisory Defendants,
denied other Defendants absolute or qualified immunity, and dismissed certain claims as unsupported by the record.

The series of events underlying this action surround Plaintiff’s arrest and 1993 conviction on charges of rape, attempted rape, and burglary. Plaintiff’s conviction was vacated in 2000 after DNA tests established that the sole physical evidence linking Plaintiff to either of the crime scenes – several hairs – could not have come from Plaintiff. All charges against Plaintiff were dismissed on August 25, 2000, after Plaintiff had spent more than seven years in custody.

For the foregoing reasons, this Court AFFIRMS in part and REVERSES in part the district court’s decisions in this case. We affirm the district court’s denial of absolute immunity to Defendants Clark, Carroll, and Katz for their pretrial, nontestimonial acts. We also affirm the district court’s refusal to grant qualified immunity to Katz and Tarter. We similarly affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of supervisory Defendants Thomas, Ammon, and Kessinger.

Finally, we affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Defendant Carroll with respect to Plaintiff’s allegations that Carroll violated Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment rights by continuing Plaintiff’s detention without probable cause.

We reverse the district court, however, on its grant of summary judgment to Defendant Katz with respect to Plaintiff’s allegations that Katz violated Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment rights by failing to disclose exculpatory evidence, thereby causing Plaintiff’s detention to continue without probable cause. We also reverse the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Defendant Clark on Plaintiff’s allegations that Clark violated Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment rights by continuing Plaintiff’s detention without probable cause. Finally, we reverse the district court’s summary judgment for Defendant City on Plaintiff’s Monell claims as they relate both to identification procedures and to disclosure of exculpatory evidence.

Please note: I reserve the right to delete comments that are inappropriate, offensive or off-topic.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.