Alvarez v. East Penn Manufacturing Co. Inc. et al
Filing 38
OPINION AND ORDER #102351 re: 12 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by East Penn Manufacturing Co. Inc. Here, there are no facts that demonstrate that plaintiffs injuries meet the threshold of a "serious injury" under the theory of &quo t;significant disfigurement." Defendants' motion is therefore GRANTED as to this claim. On the other hand, competent evidence demonstrates that there is a genuine dispute as to whether plaintiffs injuries to his cervical spine and right kn ee meet the "serious injury" threshold under a "permanent consequential limitation of use" or a "significant limitation of use" test. Accordingly, defendants' motion is DENIED as to these claims. For the foregoing reasons, defendants' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED, in part, and DENIED, in part. (Signed by Judge Richard K. Eaton on 9/17/2012) (mro) Modified on 9/19/2012 (ft).
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.
