MCANDREW v. BUCKS COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS et al
JAMES MCANDREW |
BUCKS COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, ROBERT G. LOUGHERY, DIANE M. ELLIS-MARSEGLIA, CHARLES H. MARTIN, EDWARD DONNELLY, DENNIS SHOOK and THOMAS WALTMAN |
2:2012cv04676 |
August 16, 2012 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania |
Philadelphia Office |
Bucks |
C. DARNELL JONES |
Other Civil Rights |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 114 ORDER THAT THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED AND ADOPTED. THE PARTIES' CROSS-MOTIONS TO ENFORCE SETTLEMENT ARE DENIED AS MOOT. THE CLERK OF COURT IS DIRECTED TO CLOSE THIS CASE FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SIGNED BY HONORABLE C. DARNELL JONES, II ON 7/10/2017. 7/10/2017 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(sg, ) |
Filing 12 ORDER THAT DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS (DOC. NO. 4) IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. THE MOTION TO DISMISS IS GRANTED INSOFAR AS IT SEEKS DISMISSAL OF COUNT I, PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDMENT CLAIM, AGAINST COMMISSIONER DEFENDANTS. COUN T I IS DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE AS TO COMMISSIONER DEFENDANTS, AND PLAINTIFF IS GRANTED LEAVE TO AMEND HIS COMPLAINT WITH RESPECT TO DEFENDANT COMMISSIONERS' PERSONAL INVOLVEMENT IN THE VIOLATION OF PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS. COUNT III OF THE COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. THE MOTION TO DISMISS IS DENIED IN ALL OTHER RESPECTS. SIGNED BY HONORABLE C. DARNELL JONES, II ON 11/8/2013. 11/8/2013 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(jmg, ) |
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 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.