# Walker v. City of Huntsville

> Supreme Court of Alabama · September 30, 2010 · 62 So. 3d 474

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9780470

## Case

- **Full name:** Julia Huff WALKER v. CITY OF HUNTSVILLE Et Al.
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Alabama
- **Decided:** September 30, 2010
- **Citations:** 62 So. 3d 474; 2010 Ala. LEXIS 192; 2010 WL 3798070
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Murdock
- **Judges:** Lyons, Cobb, Woodall, Stuart, Smith, Bolin, Parker, Shaw, Murdock
- **Cited by:** 50 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9780470

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that police officers sued for “failure to obtain medical treatment” for an arrestee were “exercising judgment with respect to [the plaintiff’s] arrest and performing a discretionary function in the line and scope of their law-enforcement duties within the meaning of § …
- holding that police officers sued for “failure to obtain medical treatment” for arrestee were “exercising judgment with respect to [the plaintiff's] arrest and performing a discretionary function in the line and scope of their law-enforcement duties within the meaning of § 6-5…
- holding that a plaintiff's assault and battery claims against a police officer were barred by collateral estoppel after a federal court, resolving the same plaintiffs § 1983 excessive force claim, determined the police officer’s use of force did not violate the Fourth Amendment
- holding that police officers had discretion to determine whether a prisoner was injured before or during an arrest with respect to complying with a policy requiring the officers to take injured prisoners for medical attention
- explaining that Alabama Code § 6-5-170 “defines false imprisonment as ‘the unlawful detention of the person of another for any length of time whereby he is deprived of his personal liberty’ ”

## Opinion text

MURDOCK, Justice
(concurring in the rationale in part and concurring in the result).
I concur in the result reached by the main opinion in all respects. I concur in all respects with the rationale stated in the *504 main opinion except as to the issue discussed in Part III.A. of the analysis section of the opinion. See Ex parte Monroe County Bd. of Educ., 48 So.3d 621, 630-32 (Ala.2010) (Murdock, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part); Ex parte Watson, 37 So.3d 752, 765 (Ala.2009) (Murdock, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9780470. Public record. Not legal advice.