legal-news

Sencial Sues Jefferson Parish Sheriff Lopinto in Civil Rights Case

Active Opinion issued Sign in to follow this case
Share mail
Advertisement
description

Case Summary

Steven Jay Sencial sued Jefferson Parish Sheriff Joseph Lopinto III and other defendants, raising claims that appear to stem from law enforcement conduct. The case title suggests a civil rights action against a Louisiana sheriff's office, likely brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Court, docket number, and underlying facts are not available from the title alone. No current summary exists to draw from.

Latest development

/opinion/10845321/steven-jay-sencial-v-joseph-lopinto-iii-et-al/

Opinion · April 20, 2026

The court issued a written opinion.

Key Issues

  • Potential § 1983 civil rights claims against law enforcement
  • Sheriff's liability for officer conduct
  • Qualified immunity defense
smart_toy Juryvine case summary generated from primary court records. How we verify our work.
chronic

The Story So Far

Updated 2 hours, 3 minutes ago

A federal court issued a written opinion in Steven Jay Sencial v. Joseph Lopinto III et al. on April 20, 2026.

The docket number and court of record have not been confirmed, but the case names Jefferson Parish Sheriff Joseph Lopinto III as a defendant, which places it almost certainly in the Eastern District of Louisiana.

Sencial is the plaintiff. The defendants include Lopinto in what appears to be a civil rights action — the sheriff's office is a frequent target of Section 1983 claims in that district. The specific claims, the facts alleged, and the relief sought are not yet confirmed from available case data.

The April 20 opinion is the only docketed event in the timeline. Whether the court ruled on a motion to dismiss, a motion for summary judgment, or some other pretrial matter is not yet clear. The opinion's outcome — who won, what was decided — is the central unknown.

No judge assignment is on record. That gap is unusual for an active case with a written opinion already issued, and likely reflects incomplete docket data rather than the actual state of proceedings. A judge signed that opinion; the name just hasn't surfaced here yet.

The case is listed as active. That means whatever the April 20 opinion decided, it did not end the litigation. Either the court resolved a discrete issue and the case continues, or an appeal is pending.

Until the opinion's text is reviewed, the posture stays murky.

smart_toy Juryvine case narrative generated from the full docket timeline. How we verify our work.

update What Changed This Week

1 event
menu_book
Opinion 2 hours ago
The court issued a written opinion.
receipt_long Source expand_more

/opinion/10845321/steven-jay-sencial-v-joseph-lopinto-iii-et-al/

Juryvine summaries are generated from court records. Expand "Source" on any row to see the underlying filing.

Advertisement

Case Timeline

1 event
menu_book
Opinion April 20, 2026

/opinion/10845321/steven-jay-sencial-v-joseph-lopinto-iii-et-al/

The court issued a written opinion.

Advertisement
settings_backup_restore Data provenance expand_more

Sources tracked

0 outlets · 0 articles

Timeline events

1 record on file

Last updated

24 minutes ago

Juryvine aggregates docket entries from PACER/CourtListener, press coverage, and GDELT signals. Ingestion timestamps do not appear in the What Changed feed — that reflects real court activity only.