Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Kornegey v. City of Philadelphia, 17-0392. (2018)

Court: District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania Number: infdco20180307f55 Visitors: 11
Filed: Mar. 06, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 06, 2018
Summary: ORDER CYNTHIA M. RUFE , District Judge . AND NOW , this 6th day of March 2018. upon consideration of the City Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 20), and the response thereto, and for the reasons explained in the Memorandum Opinion issued on this date, it is hereby ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows: 1. With respect to Count I of the Amended Complaint, the Motion is DENIED as to Defendants Sizer and Young, and GRANTED as to Defendants Gio
More

ORDER

AND NOW, this 6th day of March 2018. upon consideration of the City Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 20), and the response thereto, and for the reasons explained in the Memorandum Opinion issued on this date, it is hereby ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows:

1. With respect to Count I of the Amended Complaint, the Motion is DENIED as to Defendants Sizer and Young, and GRANTED as to Defendants Giorla and Lawton, against whom Plaintiff's § 1983 claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 2. With respect to Counts III and VI, the Motion is DENIED. 3. Plaintiff's claim under Count V is DISMISSED as withdrawn. 4. With respect to Counts IV, VII, VIII, and IX, the Motion is GRANTED, and the claims asserted therein are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

Defendants are directed to answer the remaining claims in the Amended Complaint within 21 days of this Order.

It is so ORDERED.

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