DADE v. GAUDENZIA, DCR., INC. et al
LEROY W. DADE, JR. |
PAT O'CONNORS, SUTTON, THOMPSON, DRUMMOND, GAUDENZIA, DCR., INC. and HOLMES |
2:2013cv01381 |
March 15, 2013 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania |
Philadelphia Office |
Favette |
WILLIAM H. YOHN |
Prisoner Petitions: Civil Rights |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 60 ORDER THAT DEFTS' MOTION TO DISMISS (DOC. NO. 26) IS GRANTED AND PLFF'S COMPLAINT AND SUPPLEMENT ARE DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. THE CLERK IS DIRECTED TO MARK THIS CASE AS CLOSED.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE WILLIAM H. YOHN, JR ON 1/7/14. 1/7/14 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE PLFF., E-MAILED TO COUNSEL.(pr, ) |
Filing 21 ORDER THAT THE MOTION IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART AS FOLLOWS: PLFF'S CLAIM UNDER 42 U.S.C. SEC. 1983 BASED ON THE HEALTH INSURANCE PORTABILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 1996 IS DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE WITH RESPECT TO ALL DEFTS. PLFF 039;S CLAIM UNDER 42 U.S.C. SEC. 1983 BASED ON THE EIGHT AMENDMENT TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION IS DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE WITH RESPECT TO DEFTS GAUDENZIA DRC, INC., AND MELVIN THOMPSON. THE BALANCE OF DEFTS' MOTION IS DENIED. PLFF IS GIVEN LEAVE TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS ORDER. SIGNED BY HONORABLE WILLIAM H. YOHN, JR ON 7/3/13. 7/8/13 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE AND E-MAILED.(fb) |
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.