COPPOLINO v. NOONAN
Plaintiff: RICHARD COPPOLINO
Defendant: FRANK NOONAN
Case Number: 2:2016cv00249
Filed: January 20, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Office: Philadelphia Office
County: Philadelphia
Presiding Judge: CYNTHIA M. RUFE
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
September 19, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 14 ORDER THAT DEFENDANT FRANK NOONAN'S MOTION TO DISMISS IS GRANTED. PLAINTIFF RICAHRD COPPOLINO'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND THE COMPLAINT IS DENIED. THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL CLOSE THIS CASE. SIGNED BY HONORABLE CYNTHIA M. RUFE ON 9/19/2016. 9/20/2016 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(sg, )
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: COPPOLINO v. NOONAN
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: RICHARD COPPOLINO
Represented By: BURTON ROSE
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 ]
Defendant: FRANK NOONAN
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?