CHAN v. COUNTY OF LANCASTER et al
Plaintiff: WENDY CHAN
Defendant: COUNTY OF LANCASTER, DENNIS STUCKEY, SCOTT MARTIN, CRAIG LEHMAN, CHARLES E. DOUTS, JR. and ANDREA MCCUE
Case Number: 5:2010cv03424
Filed: July 13, 2010
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Office: Allentown Office
County: Lancaster
Presiding Judge: JAMES KNOLL GARDNER
Nature of Suit: Employment
Cause of Action: 42:1983
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
June 4, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 74 ORDER THAT PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW HER CLAIMS AGAINST DEFENDANT DENNIS STUCKET IS GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT PLAINTIFF'S CLAIMS AGAINST DEFENDANT DENNIS STUCKET ARE WITH WITHDRAWN WITH PREJUDICE, AND, ACCORDINGLY, DEFENDANT DENNIS STUCKET IS DISMISSED FROM THE WITHIN ACTION. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ("MOTION") IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART, ETC. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JAMES KNOLL GARDNER ON 6/4/2013. 6/4/2013 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(lbs, )
September 26, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 26 ORDER THAT DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS AMENDED COMPLAINT IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE MOTION IS GRANTED TO THE EXTENT IT SEEKS DISMISSAL OF THE CLAIMS IN COUNT I AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS FOR VIOLATIO N OF PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS, FIRST AMENDMENT RETALIATION, AND CONSPIRACY; AND DISMISSAL OF THE CLAIM IN COUNT II AGAINST DEFENDANT COUNTY OF LANCASTER FOR VIOLATION OF TITLE VII OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964 AND THE CLAIM IN COUNT IV AGAINST ALL DE FENDANTS FOR VIOLATION OF THE PENNSYLVANIA HUMAN RELATIONS ACT (PHRA), TO THE EXTENT THESE CLAIMS ARE BASED ON A HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS CLAIM IN COUNT I, TO THE EXTENT IT IS BASED ON DEPRIVATIO N OF A PROPERTY INTEREST IN PLAINTIFFS EMPLOYMENT, IS DISMISSED AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS WITH PREJUDICE. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS CLAIM IN COUNT I, TO THE EXTENT IT IS BASED ON DEPRIVATION OF A LIBERTY INTEREST IN PLAINTIFF S REPUTATION, IS DISMISSED AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR PLAINTIFF TO RE-PLEAD THIS CLAIM IN IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE CLAIMS FOR FIRST AMENDMENT RETALIATION AND CONSPIRACY IN COUNT I ARE DISMISSED AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS WITHOUT PREJ UDICE FOR PLAINTIFF TO REPLEAD THESE CLAIMS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACCOMPANYING OPINION. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE CLAIM IN COUNT II AGAINST DEFENDANT COUNTY OF LANCASTER FOR VIOLATION OF TITLE VII AND THE CLAIM IN COUNT IV AGAINST ALL DEFENDANT S FOR VIOLATION OF THE PHRA, TO THE EXTENT THESE CLAIMS ARE BASED ON A HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT, ARE DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR PLAINTIFF TO REPLEAD THESE CLAIMS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACCOMPANYING OPINION. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE CLAIMS IN COUNT I FOR DEPRIVATION OF SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS AND POLITICALLY-MOTIVATED WRONGFUL TERMINATION ARE WITHDRAWN AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT IN ALL OTHER RESPECTS, DEFENDANTS MOTION IS DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT PLAIN TIFF SHALL HAVE UNTIL OCTOBER 17, 2011 TO FILE A SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS ORDER AND ACCOMPANYING OPINION. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT, IN THE EVENT PLAINTIFF DOES NOT FILE A SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT BY OCTOBER 17, 2011, DEFENDANTS SHALL HAVE UNTIL OCTOBER 31, 2011 TO ANSWER THE REMAINING CLAIMS. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JAMES KNOLL GARDNER ON 9/26/11. 9/27/11 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(mas, )
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: CHAN v. COUNTY OF LANCASTER et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: WENDY CHAN
Represented By: NINA B. SHAPIRO
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: COUNTY OF LANCASTER
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: DENNIS STUCKEY
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: SCOTT MARTIN
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: CRAIG LEHMAN
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: CHARLES E. DOUTS, JR.
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: ANDREA MCCUE
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?