MIRABELLA v. VILLARD, 14-7368. (2015)
Court: District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Number: infdco20150818b24
Visitors: 13
Filed: Aug. 17, 2015
Latest Update: Aug. 17, 2015
Summary: ORDER BERLE M. SCHILLER , District Judge . AND NOW, this 17 th day of August, 2015, on consideration of Neighbor Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Document No. 4), Municipal Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Document No. 11) and all responses thereto and replies thereon, and for the reasons provided in this Court's Memorandum dated August 17, 2015, it is hereby ORDERED that: 1. The Court GRANTS Neighbor Defendants' Motion and DISMISSES Counts I-VII for lack of supplemental jurisdict
Summary: ORDER BERLE M. SCHILLER , District Judge . AND NOW, this 17 th day of August, 2015, on consideration of Neighbor Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Document No. 4), Municipal Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Document No. 11) and all responses thereto and replies thereon, and for the reasons provided in this Court's Memorandum dated August 17, 2015, it is hereby ORDERED that: 1. The Court GRANTS Neighbor Defendants' Motion and DISMISSES Counts I-VII for lack of supplemental jurisdicti..
More
ORDER
BERLE M. SCHILLER, District Judge.
AND NOW, this 17th day of August, 2015, on consideration of Neighbor Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Document No. 4), Municipal Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Document No. 11) and all responses thereto and replies thereon, and for the reasons provided in this Court's Memorandum dated August 17, 2015, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1. The Court GRANTS Neighbor Defendants' Motion and DISMISSES Counts I-VII for lack of supplemental jurisdiction, without prejudice to filing these claims in state court.
2. The Court DISMISSES Defendants Board of Supervisors and Montgomery Township for failure to allege Monell liability on the remaining claims.
3. The Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Municipal Defendants' Motion to Dismiss.
4. The Court GRANTS in part the Motion to Dismiss and DISMISSES Count VIII for failure to allege a violation of the Equal Protection Clause without prejudice.
5. The Court DENIES in part the Motion to Dismiss Count IX only to the extent that Plaintiffs' First Amendment claims are predicated on the conduct of Defendants Walsh and McDonnell after September 20, 2014.
Source: Leagle
