FULLMAN v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
| ANDREW FULLMAN |
| CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPARTMENT, PHILADELPHIA DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SETH WILLIAMS, BARBARA A. MCDERMOTT and RICHARD ROSS, JR. |
| 2:2017cv02673 |
| June 12, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania |
| Philadelphia Office |
| Philadelphia |
| EDUARDO C. ROBRENO |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1981 |
| None |
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
99
ORDER THAT BOTH MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF NOS. 49 & 50) ARE GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDER THAT AFTER CONSIDERING PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO JOIN PARTIES (ECF NO. 86) AND MOTION TO ADD AMENDED DISCOVERY (ECF NO. 87), AND ANY RESPONSES THERETO, PLAINT IFFS MOTIONS (ECF NOS. 86 & 87) ARE DENIED. PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO APPOINT COUNSEL (ECF NO. 88) IS DENIED AS MOOT. THE MATTER IS DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.1 THE CLERK OF COURT IS DIRECTED TO CLOSE THIS CASE. SIGNED BY HONORABLE EDUARDO C. ROBRENO ON 5/5/23. 5/5/23 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(jaa, )
|
|
Filing
3
ORDER THAT LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS IS GRANTED. THE COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM. PLAINTIFF IS GIVEN 30 DAYS TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT. THE CLERK SHALL NOT MAKE SERVICE UNTIL SO ORDERED.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE EDUARDO C. ROBRENO ON 7/31/2017. 7/31/2017 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE.(kp, )
|
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.
