IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS, FIFTH CIRCUIT

 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS, FIFTH CIRCUIT

On Appeal from the United States District Courtfor the Northern District of Mississippi 

Table of Contents CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS............................................i 

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES......................................................................iii 

JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENT.............................................................1 

STATEMENT OF ISSUES PRESENTED....................................................1 

STATEMENT OF THE CASE....................................................................4

A. Procedural History.............................................................................4 

B. Statement Of Facts..............................................................................6 

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT.................................................................11 ARGUMENT...........................................................................................16

 Standard Of Review..............................................................................16 

I. THE DISTRICT COURT VIOLATED McGRUDER BY EVALUATING ONLY THE FORMAL COMPLAINT........................18 

II. THE DISTRICT COURT GRANTED ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY WITHOUT THE REQUIRED FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS.................23 

III. STUART IS INDIVIDUALLY LIABLE ON THREE INDEPENDENT THEORIES, AND QUALIFIED IMMUNITY DOES NOT BAR THOSE CLAIMS AT THE PLEADING STAGE................27 

IV. THE MONELL CLAIMS SURVIVE ON FOUR INDEPENDENT PATHS..................................................................................................33 

V. THE LEE COUNTY COURT’S CONSTITUTIONAL FINDINGS HAVE PRECLUSIVE EFFECT UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 1738...................45 

VI. THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS DEFENSE FAILS: ARNOLD’S CLAIMS DID NOT ACCRUE UNTIL THE JULY 5, 2023 DISMISSAL ..............................................................................................................49 

VII. DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND WAS ERROR.......................................................................................51 

VIII. THE MAGISTRATE’S DENIAL OF THE MOTION TO STRIKE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES WAS CONTRARY TO WOODFIELD..55 

CONCLUSION........................................................................................60 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE...................................................................63 

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE....................

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES 

Cases 

Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S. 90 (1980) ................... 2, 14, 18, 25, 26, 46, 47 Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) .................................................... 19

Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (1972) .................................................... 48 

Bazrowx v. Scott, 136 F.3d 1053 (5th Cir. 1998) (per curiam) ............... 53 

Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) ................................... 17 

Blackledge v. Perry, 417 U.S. 21 (1974) ............................................ 13, 31 

Buckley v. Fitzsimmons, 509 U.S. 259 (1993) ....... 2, 12, 24, 25, 26, 28, 62 Burns v. Reed, 500 U.S. 478 (1991) ............................................ 12, 25, 26

 Caissie v. State, 254 So. 3d 849 (Miss. Ct. App. 2018) ...... 7, 13, 32, 33, 51 

Calhoun v. Hargrove, 312 F.3d 730 (5th Cir. 2002) ............................... 20 

Carswell v. Camp, 54 F.4th 307 (5th Cir. 2022) ......................... 13, 29, 62 

City of Canton v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378 (1989) ........................ 2, 14, 35, 47 

City of St. Louis v. Praprotnik, 485 U.S. 112 (1988) ............... 3, 14, 41, 62 Cole v. Arkansas, 333 U.S. 196 (1948) .................................................... 32 

Felder v. Casey, 487 U.S. 131 (1988) .......................................... 16, 57, 62 

FTC v. American Municipal Services Corp., No. 4:17-cv-00168 (E.D. Tex.) ................................................................................. 9, 18, 36, 44, 54 

Gonzalez v. Trevino, 602 U.S. 653 (2024) .............................................. 31 

Great Plains Trust Co. v. Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co., 313 F.3d 305 (5th Cir. 2002) ................................................................................. 20, 53

 Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972) ............................................. 17, 53 

Harrison v. Chandler-Sampson Ins., Inc., 891 So. 2d 224 (Miss. 2005) .. 47 

Hartman v. Moore, 547 U.S. 250 (2006) ......................................... 13, 30 

Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994) .................................................... ............................................3, 14, 15, 38, 39, 45, 49, 50, 51, 52, 58, 59, 60

Hughes v. Tobacco Inst., 278 F.3d 417 (5th Cir. 2001) ......................... 17 

Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409 (1976) .............................................. 24 

Manuel v. City of Joliet, 580 U.S. 357 (2017) ........................................ 31 

McGruder v. Phelps, 608 F.2d 1023 (5th Cir. 1979) ................................... .............................................. 1, 5, 6, 11, 12, 16, 18, 19, 20, 23, 24, 61, 62 

Migra v. Warren City Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ., 465 U.S. 75 (1984) ........ 47 iv

Monell v. Dep't of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658 (1978) ..................................... ............................................ 2, 11, 13, 14, 24, 28, 34, 38, 39, 40, 46, 49, 61 

Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167 (1961) ......................................... 16, 58, 62 

Moore v. City of Grand Prairie, 2013 WL 1174457 (N.D. Tex. 2013) ......... ................................................................................................ 13, 30, 32, 33 

Nieves v. Bartlett, 587 U.S. 391 (2019) ................................................... 30 

Olivier v. City of Brandon, 607 U.S. ___ (2026) ...................................... 52 

Owen v. City of Independence, 445 U.S. 622 (1980) ............. 16, 50, 57, 62 

Owens v. Okure, 488 U.S. 235 (1989) .................................................... 50 

Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore, 439 U.S. 322 (1979) .............................. 47 

Patsy v. Board of Regents, 457 U.S. 496 (1982) .......................... 16, 58, 62 

Pembaur v. City of Cincinnati, 475 U.S. 469 (1986) ... 3, 14, 39, 40, 54, 62 

Ricks v. City of Winona, 858 F. Supp. 2d 682 (N.D. Miss. 2012) ........... 50 

Salazar v. Molina, 37 F.4th 278 (5th Cir. 2022) ...................................... 29 

Stripling v. Jordan Prod. Co., 234 F.3d 863 (5th Cir. 2000) .................... 53 

Thompson v. Clark, 596 U.S. 36 (2022) ...................... 3, 13, 15, 31, 51, 52 

Vann v. City of Southaven, 884 F.3d 307 (5th Cir. 2018) ................. 29, 63 

Wallace v. Kato, 549 U.S. 384 (2007) ..................................................... 51 

Webster v. City of Houston, 735 F.2d 838 (5th Cir. 1984) (en banc) ............ ...................................................................................... 3, 14, 42, 45, 54, 62 

White v. Pauly, 580 U.S. 73 (2017) ......................................................... 33 

Woodfield v. Bowman, 193 F.3d 354 (5th Cir. 1999) ................................... .................................................................... 4, 15, 16, 19, 56, 57, 59, 62, 63 Statutes 28 U.S.C. § 1291 ....................................................................................... 1 

28 U.S.C. § 1331 ....................................................................................... 1 

28 U.S.C. § 1343 ....................................................................................... 1 2

8 U.S.C. § 1738 ................................... 3, 6, 14, 15, 16, 19, 46, 47, 50, 62 42

 U.S.C. § 1983 ........... 1, 4, 11, 15, 16, 19, 39, 47, 50, 51, 57, 58, 59, 60

 Miss. Code Ann. § 15-1-49 ..................................................................... 50

 Miss. Code Ann. § 21-3-5 ....................................................................... 34 

Miss. Code Ann. § 21-17-1(6) ................................................................... 9

Miss. Code Ann. § 21-23-3 ..................................................................... 34 

Miss. Code Ann. § 21-23-7(3) ................................................................. 32 v 

Miss. Code Ann. § 99-37-7 ..................................................................... 54 

Rules Fed. R. App. P. 4(a) .................................................................................. 1

Fed. R. App. P. 32(a) .............................................................................. 65 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c) ............................................................................. 1, 2, 5, 6, 9, 12, 14, 17, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 29, 32, 33, 34, 37, 38, 51, 55, 60, 62 Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a) .......................................................................... 16, 61 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c) ................................................................................ 23 

Fed. R. Evid. 201 .............................................................................. 17, 26 

5th Cir. R. 28.2.1 ...................................................................................... i 

Other Authorities Miss. Att'y Gen. Op. No. 2014-00090, 2014 WL 1513511 (Mar. 21, 2014) ................................................................................................. 18, 25 

Miss. Att'y Gen. Op. No. 2015-00323, 2015 WL 6121930 (Sept. 18, 2015) ..................................................................................... 18, 25, 40, 54

 Miss. Att'y Gen. Op., 2024 WL 4357291 (June 24, 2024) ...................... 18