Ex parte Jefferson County
Citation | 656 So.2d 382 |
Parties | Ex parte JEFFERSON COUNTY. (Re Jeffrey HOPE, et al. v. CITY OF HUEYTOWN, et al.). 1930829. |
Decision Date | 24 February 1995 |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Charles S. Wagner, Birmingham, for petitioner.
G. Daniel Evans, Birmingham, for respondents.
Jefferson County seeks a writ of mandamus ordering the Honorable William J. Wynn, Circuit Judge, Tenth Judicial Circuit of Alabama, to dismiss all claims stated against it, on the basis of the doctrine of res judicata and on the grounds that it cannot be held liable on a respondeat superior basis for the acts or omissions of a county sheriff or the sheriff's deputy.
The facts underlying this petition are as follows: The plaintiff Jeffrey Hope is a police officer employed by the City of Hueytown. On June 6, 1991, while Hope was at work, the Multi-Agency Drug Enforcement Team ("M.A.D.E.T.") executed a search warrant at Hope's apartment. The warrant authorized a search for "cocaine, drug paraphernalia, and other evidence of drug activity."
Hope's wife and child were inside the apartment when the police arrived. The police searched the apartment and Hope's automobile. The police also searched Hope's wife and child. No evidence of any illegal substance or drug paraphernalia was found.
Hope and his wife sued the City of Hueytown, the City of Pleasant Grove, Jefferson County, M.A.D.E.T., and six individual law enforcement officers involved in the search, including a Jefferson County deputy sheriff. The Hopes brought their action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, claiming federal law violations and making state law claims. Shortly after service was perfected on the defendants, the Hopes served interrogatories and requested depositions, admissions, and production of documents. Jefferson County responded to the requests by stating that it could not answer any questions or produce any documents because, it said, it had no knowledge of the day-to-day operations of the sheriff's office. The federal court then stayed all discovery.
Jefferson County filed a "motion to dismiss, [or] alternatively, a motion for summary judgment." Jefferson County claimed that the Hopes had failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, arguing that it could not be held responsible for the activities of the Jefferson County sheriff or any of his deputies. Attached to the motion was an affidavit by the president of the Jefferson County Commission, Mary Buckelew. Buckelew stated in the affidavit that the Jefferson County Commission merely provides funds for the sheriff's office and that neither the commission nor any individual commissioner has any authority or control over the activities of the office.
The federal court entered orders in favor of all defendants. Specifically, the federal court entered a summary judgment in favor of Jefferson County. In its summary judgment order, the court said:
We note here that the Hopes contend that the federal court refused to exercise jurisdiction over the state law claims and that their action against Jefferson County based on state law claims is not barred. However, the orders attached as part of the briefs filed by the Hopes and by Jefferson County show otherwise. On October 15, 1993, the federal court specifically asserted jurisdiction over the state law claims against Jefferson County, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1367. In that order, it entered a summary judgment in favor of Jefferson County, finding that no genuine issue of material fact existed.
The Hopes cite an order dated November 15, 1993, wherein the federal court did not assert jurisdiction over certain state claims with regard to the City of Hueytown, John Taylor, the City of Pleasant Grove, Melvin Dale Smith, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Waddekk & Reed Financial, Inc. V. Torchmark Corp.
... ... As a result, on May 3, 2000, UILIC sued W & R in the Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Alabama. See Alabama Complaint, attached as Exhibit 11 to Defendant Torchmark Corporation's ... involved in the current case; and (4) the same cause of action presented in both suits." Ex parte Jefferson County, 656 So.2d 382, 384-85 (Ala.1995); see Lee L. Saad Constr. Co., Inc. v. DPF ... ...
-
Sherrod v. Webber (Ex parte Webber)
... ... On July 12, 2011, Donald Sherrod sued Webber in the small-claims court in Pickens County (the small-claims-court action). It is undisputed that Sherrod's wife Helen was not a party to the small-claims-court action. The complaint alleged ... Ex parte LCS Inc., 12 So.3d 55, 56 (Ala.2008) (citing Ex parte Sears, Roebuck & Co., 895 So.2d 265 (Ala.2004) ). See also Ex parte Jefferson Cnty., 656 So.2d 382 (Ala.1995). The standard governing our review of an issue presented in a petition for the writ of mandamus is well established: ... ...
-
Waddell & Reed Financial, Inc. v. Torchmark Corp.
... ... not reach further agreement, so on May 3, 2000, UILIC sued W & R in the Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Alabama. UILIC also sued W & R Financial, Waddell & Reed Financial Services, Inc., Waddell ... involved in the current case; and (4) the same cause of action presented in both suits." Ex parte Jefferson County, 656 So.2d 382, 384-85 (Ala.1995); see Lee L. Saad Constr. Co., Inc. v. DPF ... ...
-
Titan Indem. Co. v. Riley
... ... He served approximately three years of a 123-month sentence, first in the Montgomery County jail and then in the federal penitentiary in Oakdale, Louisiana, until his repeated habeas corpus ... Ex parte Alabama Power Co., 431 So.2d 151 (Ala.1983)." ... Titan insists that Titan I is ... This Court held in Ex parte Jefferson County 656 So.2d 382, 384-85 (Ala.1995): ... "The elements of res judicata are: (1) a prior ... ...