In Dawson v. Dorman, 10-CV-208-DLB-CJS, attorneys Jeffrey C. Mando, Jennifer L. Langen, and Claire E. Parsons obtained summary judgment for the City of Ludlow, Kentucky and several of its police officers. The Plaintiff, James Dawson, had sued the City and officers on theories of false arrest and malicious prosecution under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 for his arrest and prosecution for armed robbery. Though Dawson alleged that the officer who handled the investigation had lied to the grand jury and falsified evidence, the Eastern District of Kentucky rejected these contentions. In his opinion granting the Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment, Judge David L. Bunning held that Dawson’s claims were unsupported by the evidence or subject to immunity.
Attorneys Jeffrey C. Mando and Claire E. Parsons also obtained a favorable ruling from the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in Helfrich v. Rodriguez, 11-5099, In that case, the Plaintiff, Steven Helfrich, appealed from a defense verdict in the Eastern District of Kentucky on his claims for excessive force under Section 1983 and battery under Kentucky law against police officer, Miguel Rodriguez. On appeal to the Sixth Circuit, Helfrich sought reversal of the verdict, arguing that the trial court judge committed reversible evidentiary errors and exhibited bias in favor of Rodriguez. In her opinion affirming the jury’s verdict, Judge Jane B. Stranch rejected these arguments and found no significant errors on the part of the trial court.