Court Filings in Ekstrand et al v Duke et al

It was a busy three days preceding Thanksgiving as thirteen separate court filings were made in McFadyen et al v. Duke et al. Justia has all of them up at their site.

McFadyen et al v. Duke University et al

Of particular note was Durham attorney Bob Ekstrand's filing in representation of McFadyen. Archer, and Wilson

PLAINTIFFS’ OPPOSITION TO THE CITY OF DURHAM’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT(GOVERNMENTAL IMMUNITY)

On the LieStopper's Forum Quasimodo led the discussion

The City’s Motion seeks partial summary judgment on all of Plaintiffs’ “state law tort claims” against the City on the grounds that they are barred by governmental immunity.

Quasi pointed out that however governmental immunity does not bar Plaintiffs’ claims because;

1) Of the existing City insurance they revealed in their motion and the possibility they have others.

2) The City's probability of participation in a North Carolina League of Municipalities local government insurance pool that they failed to reveal.

3)The City Council created a "Immunity waiver Fund" and adopted resolutions that the fund created constitutes a waiver of governmental immunity.

Further that without discovery how could the City of Durham's dubious claims claims be verified.

Clearly the City of Durham's motion was premature and left out important data for the Court.

Hat Tip: Quasi, sdsgo