LADYANSKY et al v. COOPER WHEELOCK, INC. et al

Filing 58

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THAT THE PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO AMEND (DOC. NO.49) IS DENIED; SIMPLEXGRINNELL'S MOTION FOR ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT (DOC. MO.51) IS GRANTED. SIGNED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE LYNNE A. SITARSKI ON 3/29/2012. 3/30/2012 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED. (kk, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA STEPHEN LADYANSKY and BARBARA LADYANSKY, Plaintiffs, v. COOPER WHEELOCK, INC. and SIMPLEX GRINNELL, LP, Defendants. : : : : : : : : : CIVIL ACTION No.: 11-cv-102 ORDER AND NOW, this 29th day of March, 2012, upon consideration of Plaintiffs’ Motion to Amend the Complaint to Conform to the Evidence (Doc. No. 49), SimplexGrinnell’s Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion to Amend the Complaint to Conform to the Evidence (Doc. No. 50), and Plaintiffs’ Rebuttal to SimplexGrinnell’s Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion to Amend the Complaint to Conform to the Evidence (Doc. No. 53), as well as SimplexGrinnell’s Motion for Entry of Final Judgment (Doc. Nos. 51-52) and SimplexGrinnell’s Reply in Support of its Motion for Entry of Final Judgment (Doc. No. 54), and for the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion to Amend is DENIED, and SimplexGrinnell’s Motion for Entry of Final Judgment is GRANTED. BY THE COURT: /s/ Lynne A. Sitarski LYNNE A. SITARSKI 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?