M.S. v. SUSQUEHANNA TOWNSHIP SCHOOL DISTRICT, 1:13-cv-2718. (2014)
Court: District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
Number: infdco20140902e04
Visitors: 9
Filed: Aug. 29, 2014
Latest Update: Aug. 29, 2014
Summary: ORDER YVETTE KANE, District Judge. AND NOW , on this 29th day of August 2014, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Defendants' motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 10) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: 1. Plaintiffs' claims against the individually-named Defendants in their official capacities are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE . 2. Plaintiffs' claims against Defendant Susquehanna Township School District, and Defendants Kegerise, Taschner and Lovelidge in their individual capacities arising o
Summary: ORDER YVETTE KANE, District Judge. AND NOW , on this 29th day of August 2014, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Defendants' motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 10) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: 1. Plaintiffs' claims against the individually-named Defendants in their official capacities are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE . 2. Plaintiffs' claims against Defendant Susquehanna Township School District, and Defendants Kegerise, Taschner and Lovelidge in their individual capacities arising ou..
More
ORDER
YVETTE KANE, District Judge.
AND NOW, on this 29th day of August 2014, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Defendants' motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 10) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows:
1. Plaintiffs' claims against the individually-named Defendants in their official capacities are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
2. Plaintiffs' claims against Defendant Susquehanna Township School District, and Defendants Kegerise, Taschner and Lovelidge in their individual capacities arising out of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the United States Constitution are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE;
3. Plaintiffs' claim against STSD arising under Title IX, 20 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq. is not dismissed;
4. Plaintiffs' state law claims alleging negligent hiring, negligence per se and intentional infliction of emotional distress against the Susquehanna Township School District are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;
5. Plaintiffs' state law claim alleging negligent hiring against Defendants Kegerise and Lovelidge in their individual capacities is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE;
6. Plaintiffs' state law claims alleging negligence per se and intentional infliction of emotional distress against all individually-named Defendants in their individual capacities are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; and
7. Plaintiffs' claim for punitive damages is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
8. Plaintiffs are granted leave to file an amended complaint within 21 days of the date of this order.
Source: Leagle
