KURTA v. BOROUGH OF GLASSPORT

KURTA v. BOROUGH OF GLASSPORT

Plaintiff:	KEITH KURTA
Defendant:	BOROUGH OF GLASSPORT
Case Number:	2:2010cv00195
Filed:	February 12, 2010
Court:	US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
Office:	Pittsburgh Office
County:	Allegheny
Presiding Judge:	Donetta W. Ambrose
Nature of Suit:	Civil Rights: Other
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1441 cr Notice of Removal - Civil Rights
Jury Demanded By:	Defendant

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
April 23, 2010	Filing 15 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 4 Motion to Dismiss. And now, this 23rd day of April, 2010, it is ordered that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) in the form of a Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket No. 4 ) is granted in part and denied in part as follows:1.The Motion is granted at to Plaintiff's Fifth Amendment claim and Plaintiff's Fifth Amendment claim in Count II is dismissed;2.The Motion is granted as to Plaintiff's due process claim un der the Pennsylvania Constitution and said claim is dismissed from Plaintiff's Complaint, without prejudice, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1367(c)(1). 3.The Motion is denied in all other respects.It is further ordered, that Plaintiff is permitted to Amend his Complaint to make the explicit allegation that Defendant's due process violation was done pursuant to a policy, custom, or practice. The Amended Complaint shall be filed on or before May 7, 2010.An initial status conference is set for May 3, 2010, at 9:30 a.m.Signed by Judge Donetta W. Ambrose on 4/23/10. (slh)

Date Filed

Document Text

April 23, 2010

Filing 15 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 4 Motion to Dismiss. And now, this 23rd day of April, 2010, it is ordered that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) in the form of a Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket No. 4 ) is granted in part and denied in part as follows:1.The Motion is granted at to Plaintiff's Fifth Amendment claim and Plaintiff's Fifth Amendment claim in Count II is dismissed;2.The Motion is granted as to Plaintiff's due process claim un der the Pennsylvania Constitution and said claim is dismissed from Plaintiff's Complaint, without prejudice, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1367(c)(1). 3.The Motion is denied in all other respects.It is further ordered, that Plaintiff is permitted to Amend his Complaint to make the explicit allegation that Defendant's due process violation was done pursuant to a policy, custom, or practice. The Amended Complaint shall be filed on or before May 7, 2010.An initial status conference is set for May 3, 2010, at 9:30 a.m.Signed by Judge Donetta W. Ambrose on 4/23/10. (slh)

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 Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: KURTA v. BOROUGH OF GLASSPORT
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: KEITH KURTA
Represented By:	David N. Lint
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: BOROUGH OF GLASSPORT
Represented By:	Christian D. Marquis
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?