NWEGBO v. COLWYN BOROUGH et al
Filing
36
MEMORANDUM AND/OR OPINION ORDER THAT DEFT CRADDOCK'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMEN (DOC. #21) IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. DEFTS REED AND PRAY'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOC. #23) IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENID IN PART. SIGNED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE JACOB P. HART ON 7/3/2013. 7/3/2013 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(tomg, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
SUNDAY NWEGBO
:
:
:
:
:
v.
COLWYN BOROUGH, et al.
CIVIL ACTION
NO. 12-CV-05063
ORDER
AND NOW, this 3rd day of July, 2013, upon consideration of Defendant Craddock’s Motion for
Partial Summary Judgment (Docket # 21) and Defendants Reed and Pray’s Motion for Summary
Judgment (Docket #23), as well as the Plaintiff’s responses to those motions (Docket #s 24 and 25), it is
hereby ordered that Defendant Craddock’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Docket #21) is
GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART and Defendant Reed and Pray’s Motion (Docket #23) is
GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: Counts I, V, and XI of Plaintiff’s Complaint
are dismissed; Count VI is dismissed as to Defendants Craddock and Pray; and Count X is dismissed as
to Defendant Craddock..3
BY THE COURT:
/s/Jacob P. Hart
_______________________________
JACOB P. HART
3 The remaining claims are Count III- Fourth Amendment excessive force (Reed and Craddock), Count IV- Fourth
Amendment false arrest (Reed and Craddock), Count VI- First Amendment retaliation (Reed); Count VII- state law
assault and battery (Reed and Craddock); VIII- state law false arrest (Reed and Craddock), Count IX- state law false
imprisonment (Reed and Craddock), Count X- state law malicious prosecution-(Reed). No claims remain against
Defendant Pray. By Order (docket #22), Plaintiff dismissed Colwyn Borough (Count II), and false arrest, false
imprisonment and conspiracy against Defendant Pray
24
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?