PERELMAN v. PERELMAN et al
Filing
101
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THAT THE DEFEDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR LACK OF STANDING; DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS THE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM (DOC. NO. 56) IS GRANTED I NSOFAR AS THEY SEEK DISMISSAL OF ALL CLAIMS IN THE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AGAINST DEFENDANT RONAL PERELMAN (COUNTS 9, 10, AND 11) AND DEFENDANT RONALD PERELMAN IS DISMISSED AS A DEFENDANT IN THIS ACTION. THE MOTIONS ARE GRANTED INSOFAR AS THEY SEEK TO PRAYER FOR RELIEF CLAUSES 1-7 AND 10-12. THE MOTIONS ARE DENIED IN ALL OTHER RESPECTS. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JOHN R. PADOVA ON 8/27/2012. 8/28/2012 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED, E-MAILED. (kk, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
JEFFREY E. PERELMAN
v.
RAYMOND G. PERELMAN, ET AL.
:
:
:
:
CIVIL ACTION
:
NO. 10-5622
ORDER
AND NOW, this 27th day of August 2012, upon consideration of (1) Defendants’ Motion to
Dismiss or, in the alternative for Summary Judgment for Lack of Standing (construed solely as a
Motion pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)), and (2) Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Second
Amended Complaint for Failure to State a Claim (filed together as Docket Entry Number 56), all
documents filed in connection therewith, and oral argument conducted on November 22, 2011, and
for the reasons stated in the accompanying Memorandum, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AS
FOLLOWS:
1.
The Motions are GRANTED insofar as they seek dismissal of all claims in the Second
Amended Complaint against Defendant Ronald Perelman (Counts 9, 10, and 11) and
Defendant Ronald Perelman is DISMISSED as a defendant in this action.
2.
The Motions are GRANTED insofar as they seek to strike Prayer for Relief Clauses
¶¶ 1-7 and 10-12.
3.
The Motions are DENIED in all other respects.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ John R. Padova
John R. Padova, 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?