PRATT v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, PHILADELPHIA COUNTY et al

Filing 77

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THAT THE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOC.NO.48) IS DENIED. DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOC. NO.49) IS GRANTED AS OUTLINED HEREIN. SIGNED BY HONORABLE BERLE M. SCHILLER ON 2/22/2013. 2/22/2013 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE, E-MAILED.(kk, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
RAYMOND S. PRATT,
Plaintiff,
v.
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, et al.,
Defendants.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CIVIL ACTION

No. 11-1346

ORDER
AND NOW, this 22nd day of February, 2013, upon consideration of Plaintiff’s Motion
for Summary Judgment, Defendants’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and Response in
Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, Plaintiff’s opposition thereto,
Plaintiff’s Response to Defendants’ Concise Statement of Material Facts, and Plaintiff’s RookerFeldman Preclusion in Reply to Defendants’ Opposition, and for the reasons stated in this
Court’s Memorandum dated February 22, 2013, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1.

Plaintiff’s motion (Document No. 48) is DENIED.

2.

Defendants’ motion (Document No. 49) is GRANTED. The motion is
GRANTED as to all claims against the City of Philadelphia. As to Officers
Brinson and Rios, the motion is GRANTED as to the § 1985(3), intentional
infliction of emotional distress, Fifth Amendment, Sixth Amendment, Eighth
Amendment, Fourteenth Amendment, § 1986, and § 1988(a) claims.

3.

The federal claims for false arrest, malicious prosecution, and excessive force
against Officers Brinson and Rios remain unaffected by this Order.

4.

The common law conspiracy, concerted action, assault, battery, false arrest,
unlawful detention, and malicious prosecution claims against Officers Brinson

and Rios remain unaffected by this Order.

BY THE COURT:

Berle M. Schiller, J.

2