Bridgette McCoy v. Housing Auth of New Orleans, et
714 F. App'x 322
| 5th Cir. | 2017Background
- McCoy, a public housing resident at Abundance Square (The Estates), was arrested after a fight and later faced an IRMC-initiated Rule of Possession (eviction) brought by manager Odeal Skidmore-Davis with counsel James Ryan III & Jeffrey Clayman; the evicting judgment was later reversed by the Louisiana Fourth Circuit for insufficient evidence.
- McCoy sued HANO, HANO PD, Officer Silas Phipps, the Estate of New Orleans, Skidmore-Davis, and the attorneys under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and several state-law claims (abuse of process, malicious prosecution, conspiracy, etc.).
- District court granted summary judgment for HANO PD and Officer Phipps, and separately for HANO; only Skidmore-Davis proceeded to trial, and a jury found for her on all claims.
- The district court dismissed the Estate of New Orleans for failure to prosecute after McCoy failed to comply with a court show-cause order.
- McCoy appealed, challenging (1) dismissal of the Estate, (2) the summary judgment grants to HANO PD, Officer Phipps, and HANO, and (3) alleged erroneous jury instructions and judicial bias; the Fifth Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dismissal of Estate of New Orleans for failure to prosecute | McCoy contends dismissal violated her constitutional rights | Court: McCoy failed to serve the Estate and disobeyed a show-cause order | Affirmed — district court did not abuse discretion given >1 year to comply |
| Qualified immunity / probable cause for Officer Phipps; summary judgment for HANO PD | McCoy argues Phipps lacked personal knowledge, filed false documents, and arrest/records led to improper eviction | Defendants assert Phipps had at least arguable probable cause; HANO not vicariously liable and did not deprive property rights | Affirmed — qualified immunity applies if a reasonable officer could conclude probable cause; HANO entitled to judgment as matter of law |
| Summary judgment for HANO on other state claims (conspiracy, VAWA, grievance procedures) | McCoy claims violations of grievance rights and other statutes; challenges district court evidentiary rulings | HANO argues no involvement in eviction, no termination of subsidies, no conspiracy, and no vicarious liability | Affirmed — district court’s findings supported by record; state-law claims fail without underlying constitutional violation |
| Jury instructions, alleged judicial bias, and discovery rulings | McCoy alleges the court gave an instruction that forced all claims to fail, biased conduct, and improper discovery rulings | Court notes verdict form required separate findings, jury questions during deliberations were answered appropriately, and discovery was sufficient | Affirmed — no abuse of discretion; bias and many ancillary claims deemed waived for inadequate briefing |
Key Cases Cited
- Stearman v. Comm’r, 436 F.3d 533 (5th Cir. 2006) (standard of review for dismissal for failure to prosecute)
- Smith v. Reg’l Transit Auth., 827 F.3d 412 (5th Cir. 2016) (standard for de novo review of summary judgment)
- Tolan v. Cotton, 134 S. Ct. 1861 (2014) (when ruling on summary judgment, courts must view facts in light most favorable to nonmovant)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (summary judgment standard requiring that evidence permit a reasonable jury to find for nonmoving party)
- Brown v. Lynford, 243 F.3d 185 (5th Cir. 2001) (qualified immunity and probable cause burden)
- Mendenhall v. Riser, 213 F.3d 226 (5th Cir. 2000) (qualified immunity allows room for reasonable mistakes by officers)
- United States v. Cessa, 785 F.3d 165 (5th Cir. 2015) (standard for reviewing jury instructions for abuse of discretion)