Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Frederick Lewis v. Jeffery Newton
Date: 09-27-2015
Case Number: 14-2242
Judge: Paul V. Niemeyer
Court: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Plaintiff's Attorney: Mark J. Krudys
Defendant's Attorney: Carlene Booth Johnson
Description:
Frederick Lewis filed a civil action against various officials and staff at Riverside Regional Jail in Prince George County, Virginia, alleging claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) for Eighth Amendment and due process violations, as well as a Virginia state law claim for false imprisonment. The district court granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss the action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), finding that Defendants were entitled to qualified immunity and that Lewis’ claims otherwise failed as a matter of law. On appeal, Lewis challenges the court’s consideration of records appended to the motion to dismiss. A district court is required to consider documents incorporated into the complaint, Cozzarelli v. Inspire Pharms. Inc., 549 F.3d 618, 625 (4th Cir. 2008), and documents attached to a motion to dismiss that are integral to and relied on in the complaint, Zak v. Chelsea Therapeutics Int’l, Ltd., 780 F.3d 597, 606-07 (4th Cir. 2015). In addition, a court may take judicial notice of matters of public record in considering a motion to dismiss. Sec’y of State for Defence v. Trimble Navigation Ltd., 484 F.3d 700, 705 (4th Cir. 2007). Therefore, the district court did not err in considering the documents provided by the parties. Our review of the record also confirms that, in declining to release Lewis earlier, Defendants acted reasonably, as a
matter of law, in response to the ambiguous and changing information provided by the state courts. We therefore conclude that the district court appropriately dismissed Lewis’ action.
Outcome:
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:
Related Cases from UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
What was the outcome of Frederick Lewis v. Jeffery Newton?
The outcome was: Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
Which court heard Frederick Lewis v. Jeffery Newton?
This case was heard in UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, VA. The presiding judge was Paul V. Niemeyer.
Who were the attorneys in Frederick Lewis v. Jeffery Newton?
Plaintiff's attorney: Mark J. Krudys. Defendant's attorney: Carlene Booth Johnson.
When was Frederick Lewis v. Jeffery Newton decided?