WILSON v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
Filing
155
ORDER THAT DEFT'S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS IS DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE REMAINING CLAIMS AGAINST THE INDIVIDUAL DISTRICT ATTORNEY DEFTS CONCERNING THE DA DEFTS' ALLEGED ACTIONS ARE DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, ETC.. SIGNED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE L. FELIPE RESTREPO ON 5/8/13. 5/10/13 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND E-MAILED TO COUNSEL.(lvj, ) Modified on 5/10/2013 (lvj, ).
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
HAROLD C. WILSON
Plaintiff,
v.
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, et al.
Defendants.
:
:
:
:
:
:
CIVIL ACTION
NO. 04-5396
ORDER
AND NOW, this 8th day of May, 2013, having considered the Motion for Judgement on
the Pleadings filed by Defendant R. Seth Williams, the District Attorney of Philadelphia (Doc.
#121), Plaintiff’s response thereto (Doc. #123), Defendant’s Reply (Doc. #125), and the
arguments of counsel to the court, and for the reasons set forth in the accompanying
memorandum, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Judgement on the Pleadings
is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the remaining claims against the individual District
Attorney Defendants (“DA Defendants”) concerning the DA Defendants’ alleged actions during
the investigation phase are dismissed with prejudice per Plaintiff’s concession at oral argument.
See Transcript of Motion Hearing 3/22/13, at 13-14 (Doc. # 135).
BY THE COURT:
/s/ L. Felipe Restrepo
L. FELIPE RESTREPO
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?