MASON et al v. THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA POLICE DEPARTMENT et al

Filing 37

ORDER THAT PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL IS DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT PLAINTIFF SHALL FILE RESPONSES TO THE MOTIONS TO DISMISS AS OUTLINED HEREIN. SIGNED BY HONORABLE ROBERT F. KELLY ON 6/19/2014. 6/20/2014 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE AND UNREPS, E-MAILED.(kp, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
__________________________________________
:
FLORENCE ELIZABETH MASON, et al.,
:
CIVIL ACTION
:
Plaintiffs,
:
:
v.
:
No. 13-5163
:
THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, et al.,
:
:
:
Defendants.
:
__________________________________________:
ORDER
AND NOW, this 19th

day of June, 2014, upon consideration of Plaintiff, Florence

Elizabeth Mason’s (“Plaintiff”), Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Doc. No. 8), it is hereby
ORDERED that said Motion is DENIED.
It is FURTHER ORDERED that:
(1) Plaintiff shall file a Response to Defendants, the City of Philadelphia,
Commissioner Charles Ramsey, and Police Officers Fleming, Fredricsdorf,
Kopecki, Whaley, Tees, Hummel, Lamdherr, Medycki, Riddick, Long, Kensy, and
Lackey’s, Motion to Dismiss1 on or before July 3, 2014 (Doc. No. 17);

1

Local Rule of Civil Procedure 7(c) provides in relevant part that:
Unless the Court directs otherwise, any party opposing [a] motion shall
serve a brief in opposition together with such answer or other response
that may be appropriate, within fourteen (14) days after service of the
motion and supporting brief.

E.D. Pa. Local R. 7.1(c). Because of this Court’s consideration of Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of
Counsel, Plaintiff is not out of time to file Responses to the Motions to Dismiss filed by the numerous
Defendants in this action. Thus, in accordance with this Local Rule, Plaintiff is granted the time
specified in this Order to file Responses if she so desires.

(2) Plaintiff shall file a Response to Defendants, Kenneth L. Baritz, Esq., and the
Law Firm of Kenneth L. Baritz & Associates’, Motion to Dismiss on or before
July 17, 2014 (Doc. No. 25);
(3) Plaintiff shall file a Response to Defendants, PHA, Kelvin Jeremiah, Patrick
Agnew, and Frank McLaughlin’s, Motion to Dismiss on or before July 31, 2014
(Doc. No. 26);
(4) Plaintiff shall file a Response to Defendants, Robert H. Messerman, Esq., his
law firm and its employees, and Earl Smith’s, Motion to Dismiss on or before
August 14, 2014 (Doc. 32); and
(5) Plaintiff shall file a Response to Defendants, Bart Levy, Esq., and Levy Law
LLC’s, Motion to Dismiss, or alternatively, a Motion for a More Definite
Statement on or before August 28, 2014 (Doc. No. 35).

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Robert F. Kelly
ROBERT F. KELLY
SENIOR JUDGE

2