LONG et al v. BRISTOL TOWNSHIP et al

Filing 62

ORDERED THAT DEFENDANTS' MOTION IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART AS OUTLINED HEREIN. SIGNED BY HONORABLE RONALD L. BUCKWALTER ON 7/11/2012. 7/12/2012 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(sg, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

ROBERT C. LONG, SR. &
JANET V. LONG,
Plaintiffs,
v.
BRISTOL TOWNSHIP, et al.,

Defendants.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CIVIL ACTION

NO. 10-1069

ORDER
AND NOW, this 11th day of July, 2012, upon consideration of Defendants’ Motion for Summary
Judgment (Docket No. 55), and Plaintiff’s Response in Opposition (Docket No. 60), it is hereby ORDERED
that Defendants’ Motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows:
1.

Defendants’ Motion is GRANTED and JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in their favor to the
extent Plaintiffs’ claims allege deprivations of their Fifth Amendment due process rights
(Count I);

2.

Defendants’ Motion is GRANTED and JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in their favor to the
extent Plaintiffs’ claims allege deprivations of their Fourteenth Amendment procedural due
process rights (Count I);

3.

Defendants’ Motion is GRANTED and JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in their favor to the
extent Plaintiffs’ claims allege deprivations of their Fourteenth Amendment substantive due
process rights (Count I);

4.

Defendants’ Motion is DENIED to the extent Plaintiffs’ claims allege deprivations of their
Fourteenth Amendment equal protection rights (Count II);

5.

Defendants’ Motion is GRANTED and JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in their favor to the
extent Plaintiffs’ claims allege an unconstitutional taking of their property (Count III);

6.

Defendants’ Motion is DENIED AS MOOT to the extent Plaintiffs’ claims allege a civil

conspiracy (Count IV);1
7.

Defendants’ Motion, to the extent it asserts Plaintiffs have failed to establish the presence
of municipal liability on the part of Bristol Township, is DENIED;

8.

Summary judgment is DENIED AS MOOT on all claims asserted against Defendant Peggy
Horvath as she is since deceased;2

9.

Summary judgment is GRANTED on all claims asserted against Defendants Al Burgess,
Ronald Marczak, Joseph Champey, and John Gushue for actions taken in their individual
capacities as they are entitled to judicial immunityand JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in their
favor;

10.

Summary judgment is GRANTED on all claims asserted against Defendant Wendy
Margulies for actions taken in her individual capacity and JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in
her favor;

11.

Summary judgment is DENIED on all claims asserted against Defendant Glenn M. Kucher
for actions taken in his individual capacity;

12.

Summary judgment is GRANTED on all claims asserted against Defendants Tina Davis,
John Monahan, and Linda Tarlini for actions taken in their individual capacities as they are
entitled to qualified immunity and JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in their favor;

13.

Plaintiffs’ request for punitive damages is DENIED as to all § 1983 claims asserted against
Bristol Township as an entity. Plaintiffs’ request for punitive damages as to the individually
named defendants—i.e., Defendant Kucher—may proceed forward to trial.

It is so ORDERED.

BY THE COURT:

s/ Ronald L. Buckwalter
RONALD L. BUCKWALTER, S.J.

1

In their Response in Opposition (Docket No. 60), Plaintiffs withdraw their conspiracy claims
set forth in their Complaint. (See Pls.’ Resp. Opp’n 19.)
2

In their Response in Opposition (Docket No. 60), Plaintiffs withdraw their claims asserted
against Defendant Peggy Horvath on the basis that she is since deceased. (See Resp. Opp’n 20.)

2