CA5: Stay of § 1983 shooting case was properly denied pending state criminal case

Plaintiff was charged in state court and sued under § 1983 in federal court over his shooting by the police. The federal court refused a stay and plaintiff ended up taking the Fifth. The denial of the stay of the civil case was not an abuse of discretion. Langiano v. City of Fort Worth, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 5638 (5th Cir. Mar. 11, 2025):

Langiano has not explained how denying the stay resulted in substantial and irreparable prejudice. He gave his recollection and recounting of the shooting shortly after it occurred. There is no reason to believe that his statements after the shooting were untruthful or unreliable. Awaiting a day at some point in the future when Langiano’s Fifth Amendment rights are no longer in play is highly unlikely to result in probative evidence regarding his civil suit against Rollins and the City. The prejudice to Rollins and the City, however, is evident. The case had been pending for over a year and discovery was already complete. The case was ripe for resolution. Delaying that resolution for an indeterminate amount of time would adversely affect not only the defendants’ rights but the public’s interest in having this lawsuit resolved expeditiously.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Langiano’s motion to stay.

This entry was posted in Privileges. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.