Williams v. Office of General Counsel (MAG+)

M.D. Alabama

Williams v. Office of General Counsel (MAG+)

DecidedMarch 19, 2025

Docket2:24-cv-00286

StatusUnknown

This text of Williams v. Office of General Counsel (MAG+) (Williams v. Office of General Counsel (MAG+)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, M.D. Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Williams v. Office of General Counsel (MAG+), (M.D. Ala. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION

TOMMY KENDRICK WILLIAMS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO. v. ) 2:24cv286-MHT ) (WO) OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL, ) et al., ) ) Defendants. )

OPINION Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, plaintiff filed this lawsuit against the Alabama, Barbour County, and Houston County Departments of Human Resources (DHR) and the “Office of General Counsel” asserting that his placement on the Alabama Central Registry for Child Abuse and Neglect, despite a finding that the underlying complaint against him was “not indicated,” violated his rights under the First, Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments. This lawsuit is now before the court on the recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge that the motions to dismiss filed by the state and county departments be granted. There are no objections to the recommendation. After an

independent and de novo review of the record, the court concludes that the magistrate judge’s recommendation should be adopted, with the following addition. To the extent that plaintiff intended to assert a tort claim

under Alabama law against these defendants based on what he called “malicious harassment”—which could be viewed, for example, as intentional infliction of emotional distress—such a claim is barred by state

sovereign immunity. See Ex parte Franklin Cnty. Dep’t of Hum. Res., 674 So. 2d 1277, 1279 (Ala. 1996) (citing Mitchell v. Davis, 598 So. 2d 801, 806 (Ala. 1992)).

An appropriate judgment will be entered as to these defendants. DONE, this the 19th day of March, 2025.

/s/ Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION

TOMMY KENDRICK WILLIAMS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO. v. ) 2:24cv286-MHT ) (WO) OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL, ) et al., ) ) Defendants. )

OPINION Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, plaintiff filed this lawsuit against the Alabama, Barbour County, and Houston County Departments of Human Resources (DHR) and the “Office of General Counsel” asserting that his placement on the Alabama Central Registry for Child Abuse and Neglect, despite a finding that the underlying complaint against him was “not indicated,” violated his rights under the First, Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments. This lawsuit is now before the court on the recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge that the motions to dismiss filed by the state and county departments be granted. There are no objections to the recommendation. After an

independent and de novo review of the record, the court concludes that the magistrate judge’s recommendation should be adopted, with the following addition. To the extent that plaintiff intended to assert a tort claim

under Alabama law against these defendants based on what he called “malicious harassment”—which could be viewed, for example, as intentional infliction of emotional distress—such a claim is barred by state

sovereign immunity. See Ex parte Franklin Cnty. Dep’t of Hum. Res., 674 So. 2d 1277, 1279 (Ala. 1996) (citing Mitchell v. Davis, 598 So. 2d 801, 806 (Ala. 1992)).

An appropriate judgment will be entered as to these defendants. DONE, this the 19th day of March, 2025.

/s/ Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Williams v. Office of General Counsel (MAG+), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-office-of-general-counsel-mag-almd-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack