Latwan Mcelroy v. R. Cox

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Lawrence J. O'Neill United States District Judge

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action. This matter was tried before a jury on June 19, 2012. At the close of Plaintiff's case, Defendants moved for judgment as a matter of law pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(a)(1). The motion was orally argued, and the Court ruled as follows: The motion was granted as to Defendants Hankins and Stinnett, and as to Plaintiff's failure to protected claim against Defendant Acosta.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Defendants' motion for judgment as a matter of law is granted as to Defendants Hankins and Stinnett. Judgment to be entered in favor of Defendants Stinnett and Hankins on the ground that a reasonable jury would not have a legally sufficient evidentiary basis to find for Plaintiff on his claims against Defendants Hankins and Stinnett.

2. Defendants' motion for judgment as a matter of law is granted as to Plaintiff's failure to protect claim against Defendant Acosta. Judgment to be entered in favor of Defendant Acosta as to Plaintiff's failure to protect claim on the ground that a reasonable jury would not have a legally sufficient evidentiary basis to find for Plaintiff on his failure to protect claim against Defendant Acosta.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20120620