Opinion

Oyeneyin v. Bracey

Court
District Court, E.D. North Carolina
Filed
Mar 3, 2021
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 24.6%

The opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

WESTERN DIVISION

NO. 5:20-CV-503-FL

KAZEEM OLUROTIMI OYENEYIN, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

ORDER

CITY OF RALIEGH; BRYAN BRACEY )

individually; C GAGNON individually; K. )

E. VAN ALTHUIS individually; and TG )

BEATON individually, )

)

Defendants. )

This matter is before the court upon defendant City of Raleigh’s motion to dismiss pursuant

to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) (DE 37). The time for response has expired, and the

motion is unopposed. In this posture, the issues raised are ripe for ruling.

In its motion, defendant City of Raleigh demonstrates that plaintiff has failed to state a

municipal liability claim against it under Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658,

691 (1978). Plaintiff has not alleged facts connecting a policymaker to any alleged wrongdoing.

See Bryant County Bd. of Comm’rs v. Brown, 520 U.S. 397, 404 (1997). Plaintiff also has not

alleged a failure to train or supervise, or persistent and widespread custom or usage. See Semple

v. City of Moundsville, 195 F.3d 708, 713 (4th Cir. 1999); Randall v. Prince George’s County,

302 F.3d 188, 210 (4th Cir. 2002). Therefore, defendant City of Raleigh’s motion to dismiss is

GRANTED, and plaintiff’s claims against defendant City of Raleigh are DISMISSED WITHOUT

PREJUDICE.

SO ORDERED, this the 3rd day of March, 2021.

CA SE W. ELANAGSN

United States District Judge

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.