United States v. Safehouse, 19-0519. (2020)
Court: District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Number: infdco20200226d78
Visitors: 12
Filed: Feb. 25, 2020
Latest Update: Feb. 25, 2020
Summary: ORDER GERALD AUSTIN McHUGH , District Judge . For the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum, and in this Court's previous memorandum opinion of October 2, 2019, upon consideration of Defendants' Motion for Final Declaratory Judgment (ECF 137), the Government's Motion for Summary Judgment and Opposition to Defendants' Motion for Declaratory Judgment (ECF 139), and Defendants' Memorandum of Law in Opposition to the Government's Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (ECF 140), t
Summary: ORDER GERALD AUSTIN McHUGH , District Judge . For the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum, and in this Court's previous memorandum opinion of October 2, 2019, upon consideration of Defendants' Motion for Final Declaratory Judgment (ECF 137), the Government's Motion for Summary Judgment and Opposition to Defendants' Motion for Declaratory Judgment (ECF 139), and Defendants' Memorandum of Law in Opposition to the Government's Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (ECF 140), th..
More
ORDER
GERALD AUSTIN McHUGH, District Judge.
For the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum, and in this Court's previous memorandum opinion of October 2, 2019, upon consideration of Defendants' Motion for Final Declaratory Judgment (ECF 137), the Government's Motion for Summary Judgment and Opposition to Defendants' Motion for Declaratory Judgment (ECF 139), and Defendants' Memorandum of Law in Opposition to the Government's Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (ECF 140), this 25th day of February, 2020, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendants' motion is GRANTED and the Government's motion is DENIED, as follows:
1. Defendants' Motion for Declaratory Judgment is GRANTED.
2. JUDGMENT is ENTERED in favor of Safehouse and Jose Benitez and against the United States of America, U.S. Department of Justice, United States Attorney General William P. Barr, and United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania William M. McSwain on all of Plaintiff's claims and on Count I of Safehouse's counterclaim.
3. Count II of Defendants' counterclaim is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as moot.
4. It is DECLARED that the establishment and operation of Defendants' overdose prevention services model, including supervised consumption in accordance with the parties' stipulated facts (ECF 137, Ex. A), does not violate 21 U.S.C. § 856(a).
Source: Leagle
