This page uses extracted PDF text. Text can misread numbers, dates or table columns. Check the PDF before quoting or interpreting it. Redacted areas remain redacted.
18
that Officer Briggs witnessed Plaintiff touch her h usband‘s
hand, Officer Briggs stated that such act was an as sault and
battery, and Officer Briggs placed Plaintiff under arrest. (Pl.
Opp. to Dismissal 2, Dkt. No. 13). Furthermore, th e Complaint
fails to even allege that Gayle was present during Plaintiff‘s
transport to the police station, nor does it allege his presence
at the police station. Accordingly, Counts Three, Four, and
Five are dismissed against Gayle as Plaintiff fails to state a
plausible right to relief.
b. Officer Briggs
Plaintiff‘s Complaint all eges that, without justification,
Officer Briggs placed her under arrest, physically restrained
her through the use of handcuffs, and placed her in a police
vehicle and later in a holding cell. Defendant Bri ggs responds
by arguing that Counts Three, Four, and Five fail t o state a
claim because he had a good faith and reasonable be lief in the
validity of the arrest. Specifically, Briggs argue s that
because Plaintiff admits that she touched her husba nd‘s hand
during the course of a domestic argument, ―[t]he Complaint
leaves no question that Plaintiff elevated the conf rontation
with her husband from a lock-out dispute to one inv olving
physical touching.‖ (Briggs‘ Opp. Brief 7, Dkt. No . 9)
(emphasis added).
Although the Court recognizes that Briggs is shield ed from Jump to an indexed page (39 of 39)