Real v. Dunkle et al
| Fernando Real |
| Mowrey, Meyers, Gormley, Murphy, Hyslack, John Doe, Mason, Burns, Romig, Segedy, McMillan, Dascani, Dunkle, Malik and Clark |
| 3:2011cv02071 |
| November 7, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania |
| Scranton Office |
| Cumberland |
| Thomas M. Blewitt |
| A. Richard Caputo |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| 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
145
ORDER: The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Blewitt 130 is ADOPTED in full. Defendants' 115 Motion for Summary Judgment 115 is GRANTED. Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Complaint 141 is DENIED. Final judgment is entered in favor of defendants and against plaintiff. The clerk is directed to close the case file. Signed by Honorable Matthew W. Brann on 12/12/14. (km)
|
|
Filing
46
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 39 of Magistrate Judge Blewitt; DISMISSING defendant John Doe without prejudice; REMANDING the case to Magistrate Judge Blewitt. Signed by Honorable Matthew W. Brann on 5/9/13. (km)
|
|
Filing
17
ORDER re 16 Memorandum (Order to follow as separate docket entry), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:(A) Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 5) is GRANTED.(B) Magistrate Judge Blewitts Report and Recommendations (Doc. 9) to Plain tiffs Complaint is REJECTED in part and ADOPTED in part as follows:(1) The Recommendations that Plaintiffs claims for compensatory and punitive damages against Defendants in their official capacities be dismissed and that the claim for specific monet ary damages be stricken from the Complaint are ADOPTED. (2) The Recommendation to dismiss Plaintiffs Fourteenth Amendment Due Process claim with prejudice as to all Defendants is ADOPTED.(3) The Recommendation to dismiss Plaintiffs § 1981, 7; 1985(3), and § 1986 claims with prejudice as to all Defendants is ADOPTED.(4) The Recommendation to dismiss Plaintiffs § 1983 conspiracy claim with prejudice as to Defendants McMillan, Burns, Romig, Segedy, Mowrey, Dascani, and Mason is ADOPTED.(5) The Recommendation to dismiss Defendants Mowrey, Dascani, and Mason from the action with prejudice is ADOPTED.(6) The Recommendation to dismiss Defendants McMillan, Burns, Romig, and Segedy from the action without prejudice is ADOPTED. P laintiff may file an amended complaint to allege the personal involvement of Defendants McMillan, Burns, Romig, and Segedy as to Plaintiffs First Amendment retaliation and denial of access to the courts claims. (7) The Recommendation to allow Plainti ff to proceed on his First Amendment retaliation claim as to Defendants Murphy and Gormley is ADOPTED, but the Recommendation to dismiss the First Amendment retaliation claim as to Defendants Dunkle, Meyers, Doe, Hyslack, Malik, and Clark is REJECTED . Plaintiff may proceed on his First Amendment retaliation claim against Defendants Murphy, Gormley, Dunkle, Meyers, Doe, Hyslack, Malik, and Clark. (8) The Recommendation to allow Plaintiff to proceed on his First Amendment denial of access to the courts claim as to Defendants Dunkle, Meyers, Doe, Gormley, Hyslack, Malik, and Clark is ADOPTED, but the Recommendation to dismiss the First Amendment denial of access to the courts claim as to Defendant Murphy is REJECTED. Plaintiff may proceed on his First Amendment denial of access to the courts claim as to Defendants Murphy, Gormley, Dunkle, Meyers, Doe, Hyslack, Malik, and Clark. (9) The Recommendation to dismiss Plaintiffs § 1983 conspiracy claim as to Defendants Murphy, Gormley, Du nkle, Meyers, Doe, Hyslack, Malik, and Clark is REJECTED. Plaintiff may proceed on his § 1983 conspiracy claim as to Defendants Murphy, Gormley, Dunkle, Meyers, Doe, Hyslack, Malik, and Clark. (C) This case is RECOMMITTED to Magistrate Judge Blewitt for further proceedings. Signed by Honorable A. Richard Caputo on 4/23/12. (jam, )
|
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.
