CIARLONE et al v. CITY OF READING
| 5:2009cv00310 |
| January 22, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania |
| Civil Rights: Other Office |
| LAWRENCE F. STENGEL |
| Defendant |
| Federal Question |
| 42:1983 Civil Rights Act |
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
134
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THAT DEFENDANTS BRAD REINHART, JAMES ORRS, AND THE CITY OF READING'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LAWRENCE F. STENGEL ON 1/20/11. 1/21/11 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(fdc)
|
|
Filing
48
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THAT DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS IS DENIED. AN ANSWER TO THE COMPLAINT SHALL BE FILED WITHIN FOURTEEN (14) DAYS OF THIS ORDER. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LAWRENCE F. STENGEL ON 11/18/09. 11/18/09 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED, E-MAILED.(fdc)
|
|
Filing
42
MEMORANDUM/ORDER THAT THE MOTION TO QUASH A SUBPOENA AND FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER IS GRANTED, AND PLAINTIFFS AND ALL OTHER PARTIES ARE BARRED FROM SERVING ANY OTHER DISCOVERY REQUESTS UPON JUDGE SCOTT RELATED TO THIS MATTER. SIGNED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE HENRY S. PERKIN ON 10/28/09. 10/29/09 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(ky, )
|
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
| Search for this case: CIARLONE et al v. CITY OF READING | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.
