G & H Development, LLC v. Penwell
District Court, W.D. Louisiana
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM RULING
S. MAURICE HICKS, JR., District Judge.
Before the Court is a Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss the Claims against Defen*660dants Doyle Adams (“Adams”), Jim Morris (“Morris”), and Fred Rankin (“Rankin”), Individually, and the Benton-Parish Metropolitan Board of Adjustment (“the Board of Adjustment” or “the Board”) for Judicial Immunity. See Record Document 38. Plaintiff G & H Development, LLC (“G & H”) opposed the motion. See Record Document 43. For the reasons which follow, the Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.
I.BACKGROUND.
G & H is engaged in the business of developing immovable property…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Stump v. SparkmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Mireles v. WacoSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Butz v. EconomouSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Mills v. City of ShreveportDistrict Court, W.D. Louisiana · 2014
- GateHouse Water LLC v. Lost Pines Groundwater Conservation DistrictDistrict Court, W.D. Texas · 2022