MANSFIELD v. KIRZHNER

MANSFIELD v. KIRZHNER

Plaintiff:	DAVID R. MANSFIELD
Defendant:	ILONA KIRZHNER
Case Number:	2:2011cv05871
Filed:	September 15, 2011
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Office:	Philadelphia Office
County:	Philadelphia
Presiding Judge:	JOHN R. PADOVA
Nature of Suit:	Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action:	18 U.S.C. § 2511
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
May 15, 2012	Filing 30 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THAT DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS THE AMENDED COMPLAINT (DOC. 24) IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. MOTION GRANTED INSOFAR AS IT SEEKS DISMISSAL OF PLAINTIFFS FEDERAL WIRETAP ACT CLAIM. THE CLAIM IS DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE INSOFAR AS IT RESTS ON THEORIES THAT KIRZHNER INTERCEPTED CONVERSATIONS WITH THE SPECIFIC INTENT TO DISSEMINATE THEM, INVADE PLAINTIFFS PRIVACY, DEFAME HIM OR TORTIOUSLY INDUCE HIM. THE CLAIM IS DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE INSOFAR AS IT RESTS ON A TH EORY THAT KIRZHNER INTERCEPTED CONVERSATIONS WITH THE PURPOSE OF TORTIOUSLY INTERFER WITH PLAINTIFFS BUSINESS OR CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIP. PLAINTIFF MAY FILE A SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT THAT RE-ASSERTS A CLAIM BASED ON THE TORTIOUS INTERFERNCE THEORY ON OR BEFORE 6/5/12. THE MOTION IS DENIED IN ALL OTHER RESPECTS.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JOHN R. PADOVA ON 5/15/12. 5/16/12 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO ALL COUNSEL. COPIES AVAILABLE IN HARD COPY ONLY PER COURT ORDER OF 10/5/2011, DOC. 14.(rf, )

Date Filed

Document Text

May 15, 2012

Filing 30 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THAT DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS THE AMENDED COMPLAINT (DOC. 24) IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. MOTION GRANTED INSOFAR AS IT SEEKS DISMISSAL OF PLAINTIFFS FEDERAL WIRETAP ACT CLAIM. THE CLAIM IS DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE INSOFAR AS IT RESTS ON THEORIES THAT KIRZHNER INTERCEPTED CONVERSATIONS WITH THE SPECIFIC INTENT TO DISSEMINATE THEM, INVADE PLAINTIFFS PRIVACY, DEFAME HIM OR TORTIOUSLY INDUCE HIM. THE CLAIM IS DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE INSOFAR AS IT RESTS ON A TH EORY THAT KIRZHNER INTERCEPTED CONVERSATIONS WITH THE PURPOSE OF TORTIOUSLY INTERFER WITH PLAINTIFFS BUSINESS OR CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIP. PLAINTIFF MAY FILE A SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT THAT RE-ASSERTS A CLAIM BASED ON THE TORTIOUS INTERFERNCE THEORY ON OR BEFORE 6/5/12. THE MOTION IS DENIED IN ALL OTHER RESPECTS.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JOHN R. PADOVA ON 5/15/12. 5/16/12 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO ALL COUNSEL. *COPIES AVAILABLE IN HARD COPY ONLY PER COURT ORDER OF 10/5/2011, DOC. 14*.(rf, )

Access additional case information on PACER

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 Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: MANSFIELD v. KIRZHNER
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: ILONA KIRZHNER
Represented By:	WILLIAM H. DEVANEY
Represented By:	JOSHUA DAVID HILL
Represented By:	DOREEN S. MARTIN
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: DAVID R. MANSFIELD
Represented By:	MARK S. HALTZMAN
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

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.

Why Is My Information Online?