SZALABAWKA v. RUSSO et al
| BRANDON SZALABAWKA, MARIA M. ARENAS-JORDAN and JOSE ARENAS |
| JAMIE RUSSO, GABRIEL AMORY, MICHAEL BROWN, MELANIE SZOSZOREK, TODD MCLAUGHLIN, GEOFFREY FILUTZE, LUKE YATES, ANTHONY TALARICO, JAMES BIELAK, STEVEN DELUCA, PETER DREGALLA, ROBERT BORLAND, RICHARD ROMANSKI and WILLIAM GOODZICH |
| 1:2009cv00088 |
| April 15, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania |
| Civil Rights: Other Office |
| Erie |
| Sean J. McLaughlin |
| None |
| Federal Question |
| 42:1983 Civil Rights Act |
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
75
MEMORANDUM OPINION re 68 Amended MOTION for Attorney Fees filed by BRANDON JORDAN, MARIA M. ARENAS-JORDAN, JOSE ARENAS. The court will grant Plaintiffs' Amended Motion for Costs and Attorney's Fees to the extent that Maria Jordan w ill be awarded $350.00 in taxable costs and $1.00 in nominal damages. In all other respects, the Plaintiffs' motion will be denied. Defendants' renewed motion for costs pursuant to Rule 68 will be granted to the extent that Defendants who extended the offer will be awarded $1,308.75 in deposition-related costs. In all other respects, Defendants motion will be denied. Signed by Chief Judge Joy Flowers Conti on 3/5/2014. (cal)
|
|
Filing
71
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF JUDGMENT: AND NOW, to wit, based upon the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, IT IS ORDERED that Defendants' Post Trial Motion 53 pursuant to Rule 50(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Proce dure shall be, and hereby is, DENIED in part and GRANTED in part as follows: 1. The motion is DENIED insofar as it relates to Plaintiff Maria Arenas-Jordan's claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Officer Anthony Talarico premised upon the P laintiff's arrest. 2. The motion is GRANTED insofar as it relates to Plaintiffs' claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Officer Richard Romanski premised upon the search of Plaintiffs' home. In accordance with this ruling, JUDGMENT shall be, and hereby is, entered in favor of Defendant Romanski and against Plaintiffs Brandon Jordan, Maria Arenas-Jordan, and Jose Arenas with regard to said claim. Signed by Judge Sean J. McLaughlin on 03/21/13. (kas)
|
|
Filing
35
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF JUDGMENT: AND NOW, to wit, this 28th day of September, 2011, for the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 25 shall be, and h ereby is, GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows: 1. Said motion is GRANTED insofar as it relates to Plaintiffs' claim that Maria Arenas-Jordan was subjected to excessive force in violation of her Fourth Amendment rights. As to this part icular claim, JUDGMENT shall be, and hereby is, entered in favor of the Defendants and against Plaintiff Maria Arenas-Jordan; 2. Said motion is GRANTED insofar as it relates to Plaintiffs' claim that Jose Arenas was subjected to excessive force in violation of his Fourth Amendment rights. As to this particular claim, JUDGMENT shall be, and hereby is, entered in favor of the Defendants and against Plaintiff Jose Arenas; 3. Said motion is GRANTED insofar as it relates to any and all claims d irected against Officers Melanie Szoszorek, Luke Yates, and Peter Dregalla. As to such claims, JUDGMENT shall be, and hereby is, entered in favor of Defendants Szoszorek, Yates, and Dregalla and against Plaintiffs; and 4. Said motion is DENIED in all other respects. Signed by Judge Sean J. McLaughlin on 09/28/2011. (kas)
|
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 Western 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.
