Muth v. Woodring et al
| Ronald E. Muth |
| Dennis A. Woodring, Jeffrey M. Schriver, City of Harrisburg, PA, Dauphin County, PA and State Farm Fire and Casualty Company |
| 1:2014cv01798 |
| September 16, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania |
| Harrisburg Office |
| Dauphin |
| Yvette Kane |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
61
ORDER (memorandum filed previously as separate docket entry. IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. Defendants Shriver and Harrisburg's motion 27 to dismiss count 1 of Plaintiffs amended complaint is GRANTED, and count 1 is DISMISSED asto Defendant Shriver; 2 . Defendants Woodring and Dauphin Countys motion 55 for judgment on the pleadings is GRANTED in its entirety, and counts 1 and 2 are DISMISSED as to Defendant Woodring, and count 3 is DISMISSED as toDefendant Dauphin County; and 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE the case. Signed by Honorable Yvette Kane on 8/17/17. (rw) Modified on 8/17/2017 (rw).
|
|
Filing
48
ORDER (memorandum filed previously as separate docket entry) - IT IS ORDERED THAT: Defendant State Farms motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 26) is GRANTED, and count two of Plaintiffs amended complaint is dismissed without prejudice. Defendants Harrisburg and Schrivers motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 27) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. 26 27 Signed by Honorable Yvette Kane on 11/30/15. SEE ORDER. (sc)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Pennsylvania Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
