PERELMAN et al v. PERELMAN
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THAT THE PLAINTIFFS' ORIGINAL MOTION TO DISMISS COUNTERCLAIMS (DOC. NO.45)IS GRANTED. ALL OF RAYMOND'S COUNTERCLAIMS ARE HEREBY DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. COUNT I OF THE AMENDED COMPLAINT, THE SOLE REMAINING COUNT IN THIS CASE, IS DISMISSED AS MOOT. THE PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS ALSO DENIED AS MOOT. THE CLERK SHALL MARK THIS CASE CLOSED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE MARY A. MCLAUGHLIN ON 5/2/2013. 5/2/2013 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND E-MAILED. (kk, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
JEFFREY E. PERELMAN, et al.
RAYMOND G. PERELMAN
AND NOW, this 2nd day of May, 2013, upon consideration
of the plaintiffs’ original motion to dismiss counterclaims
(Docket No. 45), the response in opposition, and the reply
And also upon consideration of the plaintiffs’ renewed
motion to dismiss counterclaims and motion for summary judgment
on Count I of the Amended Complaint (Docket No. 97), the
response in opposition, and the reply thereto;
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, for the reasons stated in a
memorandum of law bearing today’s date, that:
The plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss Raymond G. Perelman’s
counterclaims is GRANTED.
All of Raymond’s
counterclaims are hereby dismissed with prejudice.
Count I of the amended complaint, the sole remaining
count in this case, is DISMISSED AS MOOT.
In view of
that decision, the plaintiffs’ motion for summary
judgment is also DENIED as moot.
The Clerk shall mark this case as closed.
BY THE COURT:
_/s/ Mary A. McLaughlin_
MARY A. McLAUGHLIN, J.
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?