Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

ASHTON v. KNEPP, 1:12-cv-01920. (2014)

Court: District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania Number: infdco20140806c28 Visitors: 5
Filed: Aug. 05, 2014
Latest Update: Aug. 05, 2014
Summary: ORDER YVETTE KANE, District Judge. AND NOW, on this 5th day of August 2014, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Magistrate Judge Mehalchick's Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 119) is ADOPTED, Defendants' objections (Doc. No. 120) are OVERRULED, and Defendants' motions to dismiss with prejudice (Doc. Nos. 77, 81) are GRANTED with respect to the follow claims: (1) Plaintiff's claims against Defendants Knepp, Gingerich, Jacobson, Reedy, Tritt, Sommers, and Pepperling in their official capacit
More

ORDER

YVETTE KANE, District Judge.

AND NOW, on this 5th day of August 2014, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Magistrate Judge Mehalchick's Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 119) is ADOPTED, Defendants' objections (Doc. No. 120) are OVERRULED, and Defendants' motions to dismiss with prejudice (Doc. Nos. 77, 81) are GRANTED with respect to the follow claims:

(1) Plaintiff's claims against Defendants Knepp, Gingerich, Jacobson, Reedy, Tritt, Sommers, and Pepperling in their official capacities; (2) Plaintiff's claims against the Department of Corrections, the Bureau of Community Corrections, Wernersville Community Corrections Center, and Luzerne County Probation Services as barred by the Eleventh Amendment; (3) Plaintiff's conspiracy claims against all Defendants; (4) Plaintiff's claims against Tritt, Sommers, Gingerich, and Jacobson in their supervisory roles; (5) Plaintiff's Fourth Amendment claims; (6) Plaintiff's procedural due process claim; (7) Plaintiff's Civil Rights Act claim; (8) Plaintiff's municipal liability claims against Defendants the Department of Corrections, the Bureau of Community Corrections, Wernersville Community Corrections Cetner, Luzerne County Probation Services, Tritt, Sommers, Gingerich, and Jacobson; (9) Plaintiff's Fifth Amendment claims; (10) Plaintiff's credit for time claims against the Department of Corrections; (11) Plaintiff's Anti-Discimination claim pursuant to the Pennsylvania Constitution; (12) Plaintiff's IIED claim; and, (13) Plaintiff's defamation claim.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT Defendants' motion to dismiss the following claims (Doc. No. 77) is GRANTED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to Plaintiff's right to amend his complaint regarding these claims within thirty days of the date of this order:

(1) Plaintiff's Americans with Disabilities Act and Rehabilitation claims against Defendants Knepp, Gingerich, and Jacobson; and (2) Plaintiff's Pennsylvania Human Relations Act claim.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT Defendants' motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 77) is DENIED with respect to:

(1) Plaintiff's First Amendment retaliation claim against Defendants Knepp and Gingerich, (2) Plaintiff's Higher Education Act claim, (3) Plaintiff's Equal Protection Claim against Defendants Knepp, Gingerich, Reedy, and Jacobson, and, (4) Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claims against Defendants Knepp, Gingerich, and Reedy.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the case is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further pretrial management.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer