Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Ray v. Estate of Gray
United States District Court, S.D. Alabama, Northern Division
May 31, 2019
SYLVIA RAY, as personal representative of the Estates of Paige Mitchell and Kaci Mitchell, Plaintiff,
v.
ESTATE OF BRADLEY ELLIOTT GRAY and CITY OF MOUNDVILLE, Defendants.
ORDER
KRISTI
K. DUBOSE CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
This
matter is before the Court on Defendant City of
Moundville's motion to strike/dismiss (Doc. 4),
Plaintiff's response (Doc. 9) and Defendant's reply
(Doc. 11); and Plaintiff's motion for leave to amend the
complaint (Doc. 19) and Defendant's response (Doc. 20).
I.
Background
On
January 25, 2019, Plaintiff initiated this action in the
Circuit Court of Hale County, Alabama alleging claims for
wrongful death (of Paige Mitchell and Kaci Mitchell) and
Section 1983 liability against the Estate of Bradley Elliott
Gray (who killed the Mitchells with a firearm returned to him
by the Moundville police department), the City of Moundville,
the Moundville Police Department, and fictitious parties
#1-10. (Doc. 1-1).[1] In so doing, Plaintiff describes
fictitious parties #1-10 as follows and alleges the following
claim against them (Count IV):
No. 1: The correct name of the defendant identified as the
Estate of Bradley Elliott Gray, if that defendant has been
improperly identified by that name;
No. 2: The personal representative of the defendant
identified as the Estate of Bradley Elliott Gray;
No. 3: The administrator ad litem of the defendant identified
as the Estate of Bradley Elliott Gray;
No. 4: The correct name of the defendant identified as City
of Moundville, if that defendant has been improperly
identified by that name;
No. 5: The correct name of the defendant identified as
Moundville Police Department, if that defendant has been
improperly identified by that name;
Nos. 6-10: The persons, officers, employees, agents or
representatives of the defendants identified as City of
Moundville and Moundville Police Department, who engaged in
the conduct described in this complaint.
Plaintiffs aver that the identities of the fictitious party
defendants are otherwise unknown to them at this time, or if
their names are known, their identities as proper party
defendants are not known to them at this time, and their true
names will be substituted by amendment when ascertained.
Count
IV
Claims
Against ...