Rittenhouse Entertainment, Inc. et al v. City of Wilkes-Barre et al
| Rittenhouse Entertainment, Inc., The Mines, Inc., G Net Comm. Co., Phoenix Estates and Thomas J. Greco |
| City of Wilkes-Barre, Thomas Leighton, Gerald Dessoye, J.J. Murphy, Tony Thomas, Jr., Kathy Kane, Willam Barrett, Rick Cronauer, Michael Merritt, Butch Frati, Luzerne County, Michael Savokinas, King's College, Thomas J. O'Hara, Robert McGonigle, Paul Lindenmuth and John McAndrew |
| 3:2011cv00617 |
| April 4, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania |
| Scranton Office |
| Luzerne |
| A. Richard Caputo |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1981 |
| Plaintiff |
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
255
MEMORANDUM (Order to follow as separate docket entry) re 244 MOTION for Reconsideration re 239 Order (memorandum filed previously as separate docket entry), 238 Memorandum (Order to follow as separate docket entry) filed by G Net Comm. Co., Thomas J. Greco, 240 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by King's College, 242 MOTION for Reconsideration re 239 Order (memorandum filed previously as separate docket entry), 238 Memorandum (Order to follow as separate docket entry) filed by Thomas Leighton, City of Wilkes-Barre, Gerald Dessoye. Signed by Honorable Jennifer P. Wilson on 8/10/2021. (ve)
|
|
Filing
239
ORDER (memorandum filed previously as separate docket entry) re: Summary Judgment. See order for further details. Signed by Honorable Jennifer P. Wilson on 5/7/2021. (ve)
|
|
Filing
202
ORDER (memorandum filed previously as separate docket entry). (1) Defendants McAndrew and Lindenmuth are dismissed from the case. (2) City Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment 135 is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows: (a) the Motion i s GRANTED, and judgment entered in favor of City Defendants, with respect to all claims in Counts I, II, III, IV, and VI.(b) The Motion for Summary Judgment is otherwise DENIED. (3) College Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment 138 is GRANTED in p art and DENIED in part as follows: (a) The Motion is GRANTED, and judgment entered in favor of College Defendants, with respect to all claims in Counts I, II, and III.(b) The Motion for Summary Judgment is otherwise DENIED. (4) County Defendants Moti on for Summary Judgment 141 is GRANTED, and judgment entered in favor of County Defendants. (5) The state law claims in Count V are DISMISSED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (6) The Clerk of Court is directed to close the case.Signed by Honorable A. Richard Caputo on 8/8/18. (dw)
|
|
Filing
60
ORDER re 59 Memorandum (Order to follow as separate docket entry) IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:(1)The City Defendants Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 40) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows:(a)The §§ 1983 and 1985 claims asserted by Mr. Greco and Rittenhouse in Count I are DISMISSED with prejudice. (B)Count IIs §§ 1981 and 1982 claims against the City Council members, J.J. Murphy, and Butch Frati, as well as Rittenhouses § 1985 claim against all City Defendants, a re dismissed with prejudice. (c)The motion to dismiss is otherwise DENIED.(2)The County Defendants Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 39) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows:(a)The § 1983 claims asserted by Mr. Greco and Rittenhouse and the &# 167; 1985 claims asserted by The Mines, Mr. Greco, and Rittenhouse in Count I are DISMISSED with prejudice.(b)Count IIs claims are DISMISSED with prejudice.(c)The motion to dismiss is otherwise DENIED.(3)The College Defendants Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 41) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows:(a)The §§ 1983 and 1985 claims asserted by Mr. Greco and Rittenhouse in Count I are DISMISSED with prejudice.(b)Count IIs §§ 1981, 1982, and 1985 claims asserted by Mr. Greco a nd Rittenhouse are DISMISSED with prejudice. (c)The motion to dismiss is otherwise DENIED.(4)Defendants shall file a response to Plaintiffs Amended Complaint within twenty-one (21) days from the date of entry of this Order. Signed by Honorable A. Richard Caputo on 8/16/12. (jam, )
|
|
Filing
57
ORDER re 56 Memorandum (Order to follow as separate docket entry). IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion for Reconsideration by Defendants Luzerne County and Michael Savokinas (Doc. 33) is DENIED. Signed by Honorable A. Richard Caputo on 6/4/12. (jam, )
|
|
Filing
31
MEMORANDUM (Order to follow).Signed by Honorable A. Richard Caputo on 3/19/2012. (bg, )
|
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 Middle 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.
