Preview:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

DARREN CAIN Plaintiff vs. MONTGOMERY COUNTY, et al. Defendants * * *

* * * * * o0o MEMORANDUM * * * CIVIL NO. JFM-99-3122

Plaintiff has instituted this action alleging that his federal and state constitutional rights were violated when he was stopped, forced to lie on the ground, and temporarily

handcuffed by Montgomery County police officers on June 5, 1997.1

Briefly described, based upon the allegations in the complaint, the following occurred on June 5, 1997. Plaintiff was driving his vehicle when he was pulled over by one of the defendants. When approached by the officer, plaintiff handed over his driver's license and registration and attempted to explain that he was a correctional officer and was in possession of a gun and would be handing over his gun permit along with the other requested materials. When the officer heard the mention of a gun, he immediately drew his weapon and aimed it at plaintiff's head. The officer also instructed plaintiff to put down his identification and put his hands where the officer could see them. Plaintiff continued to attempt to explain that he was a correctional officer and had appropriate identification. A second officer then arrived on the scene and also drew his weapon and aimed it at plaintiff. Plaintiff was asked to step out of his vehicle, and as he opened the door, one of the officers pulled him out of the car. He was told to lie on the ground which he did with no resistence. One of the

1

Defendants have filed a motion to dismiss or for summary judgment on the grounds of res judicata. granted. In 1998, plaintiff instituted an action in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County, Maryland, asserting claims for false arrest and imprisonment, assault and battery, and negligence, arising out of precisely the same facts upon which the present action is based. eventually That action was vigorously litigated but was with prejudice because of plaintiff's The motion will be

dismissed

failure to answer interrogatories. this dismissal. Under with Maryland

Plaintiff did not appeal "at the least same one as a effect court

law, is

of...[a]

dismissal

prejudice

enter[ing] a final adjudication of the merits."

Claibourne v.

Willis, 347 Md. 684, 692 (1997). As a judgment on the merits, the dismissal with prejudice of the Montgomery County suit bars not only claims that were asserted but that could have been asserted in the earlier suit. Federated Department Stores, Inc.

v. Moitie, 452 U.S. 394, 398 (1981); Richman v. F.W.B. Bank, 122 Md. App. 110, 148 (1998).

officers then handcuffed plaintiff. Plaintiff continued to advise defendants that he was a correctional officer and had credentials in the car to prove that fact. Finally, one of the defendants went into plaintiff's vehicle, examined the identification, and instructed the other defendant to remove the handcuffs. 2

A

separate

Order

granting

defendants'

motion

is

being

entered herewith.

__________________________ J. Frederick Motz United States District Judge

3



Download Cain v Montgomery.pdf

Maryland Law