This case involves counterclaims by New Life Art, Inc. against University of Alabama officials for intentional interference with business relations, arising from a broader dispute filed by the University in 2005. The district court denied the officials' emergency motion to stay all proceedings pending their appeal of prior orders. Those orders had struck as untimely the officials' affirmative defenses (including state agent immunity) and summary judgment motion, which were filed after the close of discovery, entry of the pretrial order, and shortly before the scheduled trial. The court reasoned that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the pretrial order control the course of litigation, that modifications require good cause to avoid manifest injustice or prejudice, and that the belated assertions violated due process without any prior waiver or abandonment of the defenses.
The case involved two former employees of PPG Industries who sued the company alleging gender discrimination under Title VII after being terminated following an investigation into sexual harassment complaints against them. They also brought state law claims for defamation, breach of contract, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The court granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment on all claims. The court reasoned that the plaintiffs failed to show that the termination was based on gender rather than the company's reasonable belief that the harassment occurred, that the defamation claims failed because the statements were true or not published, and that the other claims lacked sufficient evidence.
In this drug and firearms case, defendants Jason Cooley and Detrick Jackson moved to suppress evidence as the fruit of an unlawful seizure. Birmingham police officers had pulled into a parking lot, blocked the defendants' parked car with their patrol vehicle, approached on foot, and issued a direct order for the driver to remain inside, all without observing any traffic violations, suspicious conduct, or other criminal activity. The court concluded that these actions amounted to an unreasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment because a reasonable person would not have felt free to leave, given the officers' show of authority. Accordingly, the motions to suppress were granted and the charges were dismissed.
In this Title VII and Section 1981 action, plaintiff Reshunda Lyons alleged that defendant Huntsville Wholesale Furniture subjected her to a racially hostile work environment by playing songs containing racial slurs during training and requiring employees to dance to them, then terminated her after she complained. The court denied the defendant's motion for summary judgment. It found that the undisputed facts established a prima facie case of hostile work environment because the plaintiff, a Black woman, was subjected to severe racially offensive conduct that altered the terms of employment, and a prima facie case of retaliation because she engaged in protected activity by complaining and suffered the adverse action of termination immediately afterward.
This case involved an appeal by defendant Julian B. Burnett from his convictions for indecent exposure and public lewdness on federal property at the Wheeler National Wildlife Refuge, stemming from an encounter with an undercover officer during a sting operation. The court addressed whether lack of consent is an essential element of each offense under the Alabama laws incorporated by federal regulation and whether the magistrate judge abused discretion in imposing the maximum six-month sentence. It held that consent is required for indecent exposure under Alabama Code § 13A-6-68(a) because it is classified as a sexual offense, but not for public lewdness, leading to reversal of the indecent exposure conviction while affirming the public lewdness conviction and sentence. The sentencing was upheld as within the magistrate's discretion based on factors including perjury and other conduct. The decision relied on the statutory definitions and classifications in Alabama criminal law as applied through 50 C.F.R. § 27.83.
This case involved a lawsuit by Vivian Drake against the Birmingham Board of Education, which proceeded to trial and resulted in a final judgment and permanent injunction against the Board. After the judgment, the Board moved to recuse the presiding judge under 28 U.S.C. § 455(a), alleging an appearance of partiality due to the judge's recent ordination as a deacon at Sixth Avenue Baptist Church, where the plaintiff and her husband also held leadership roles as deaconess and deacon. The court denied the motion, finding no evidentiary support for any personal or extrajudicial relationship that would question the judge's impartiality, noting that the judge had no prior knowledge of the parties' church roles and had only encountered them in court, and concluding that the motion was untimely because the Board had known of the relevant facts since at least the plaintiff's 2005 deposition.