Preview:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND JACK AMES, et al., Plaintiffs, v. HARFORD COUNTY, et al., Defendants. * * Civil No. RDB 09-1929 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiffs have brought this action asserting numerous constitutional and common law claims against Harford County (the "County"), the Town of Bel Air, the Superintendent of the Maryland State Police, the Sheriff of Harford County, seven Maryland State Police troopers, three Bel Air Police officers, and an employee of Harford County. Plaintiffs' claims relate to their arrest, search, and detainment that occurred after their involvement in an anti-abortion protest in Harford County, Maryland on August 1, 2008. Plaintiffs challenge the constitutionality of Defendants' conduct and policies and they seek declaratory and injunctive relief as well as damages. This Memorandum Opinion addresses two motions to dismiss, or, in the alternative, for summary judgment--one filed by the Town of Bel Air and the Bel Air police officers (Paper No. 36) and another filed by the Superintendent of the Maryland State Police and the State Police troopers (Paper No. 46). The issues have been fully briefed and no hearing is necessary. See Local Rule 105.6 (D. Md. 2009). For the reasons stated below, both motions are DENIED. BACKGROUND

In ruling on a motion to dismiss, "[t]he factual allegations in the Plaintiff[s'] complaint must be accepted as true and those facts must be construed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff[s]." Edwards v. City of Goldsboro, 178 F.3d 231, 244 (4th Cir. 1999). Plaintiffs Jack Ames, Laura Beeson, Nathan Cain, Patrick Mooney, Albert Stecklein, Timothy Sullivan, and Jessica Ward were participants in a week-long anti-abortion demonstration event sponsored and conducted by Plaintiff Defendant Life, a non-profit organization based in Maryland. Am. Compl.

Download Jack Ames, et al v. Harford County, et al.pdf

Maryland Law