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, )
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?