Filed Date: 1993
Clearinghouse coding complete
In 1993, the parents of a juvenile offender filed suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the state of Louisiana in the Civil District Court, Parish of Orleans. The plaintiffs alleged that the juvenile court judicial administrator wrongfully sent their minor son to a juvenile detention center where he was allegedly raped. The Civil District Court (Judge George C. Connolly, Jr.) denied the state's motion for summary judgment and the state applied for writs to the Court of Appeals, which were denied on August 2, 1993. The state further filed for certiorari to the Louisiana Supreme Court. On November 29, 1993, the state's writs to the Supreme Court were granted, and the case was remanded to the State Court of Appeal. Doe v. Foti, 629 So.2d 407 (La. 1993).
On May 15, 2006, the Louisiana Court of Appeals (Judge Robert J. Klees) granted the state's motion for summary judgment, holding that the state was immune from suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court reasoned that the state received immunity because the judicial administrator performed a judicial function in deciding to send the plaintiff's son to the detention center. Doe v. Foti, 634 So.2d 58 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1994). Moreover, the plaintiffs' evidence (an unsigned "incident report") in opposition to the state's motion was insufficient to preclude summary judgment.
We do not have the docket or any further information on the case.
Summary Authors
Stacey Jensen (5/15/2006)
Armstrong, Robert R. Jr. (Alabama)
Klees, Robert J. (Louisiana)
Breslin, T. Peter (Louisiana)
Barkley, Robert E. Jr. (Louisiana)
Ieyoub, Richard P. (Louisiana)
Armstrong, Robert R. Jr. (Alabama)
Klees, Robert J. (Louisiana)
Waltzer, Miriam G. (Louisiana)
Last updated Aug. 30, 2023, 2:28 p.m.
Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.State / Territory: Louisiana
Case Type(s):
Key Dates
Filing Date: 1993
Case Ongoing: No reason to think so
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
Juvenile offender alleging that juvenile court judicial administrator wrongfully sent juvenile to juvenile detention center where he was allegedly raped
Plaintiff Type(s):
Public Interest Lawyer: No
Filed Pro Se: Unknown
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
Templeman Detention Center, Private Entity/Person
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: Defendant
Nature of Relief:
Source of Relief:
Issues
Jails, Prisons, Detention Centers, and Other Institutions:
Sexual abuse by residents/inmates
Affected Sex or Gender:
Type of Facility: