YARUS v. WALGREEN CO.
ORDER THAT UPON CONSIDERATION OF DEFENDANTS' MOTION 84 , IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT SAID MOTION 84 , IS DENIED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE C. DARNELL JONES, II ON 8/24/15. 8/25/15 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(ti, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
LANCE YARUS, D.O.,
WALGREEN COMPANY and
WALGREEN EASTERN CO., INC.,
AND NOW, this 24th of August, 2015, upon consideration of Defendants’ Motion, (Dkt No.
84), and Memorandum of Law, (Dkt No. 84-2), to add to the verdict slip or alternatively to join
as third-party Defendants, James Tinnyo, Esq. and the Law Firm of Thomas, Thomas & Hafer,
LLP (collectively the “Tinnyo Parties”), Plaintiff’s Response, (Dkt No. 88), Plaintiff’s Amended
Complaint, (Dkt No. 10), Defendants’ Answer to Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (Dkt No. 12),
the expert report of Dr. Paul M. DiKun, (Dkt No. 84-5; Dkt No. 88-5; Dkt No. 89-24), the expert
report of Dr. Nicholas DePace (Dkt No. 84-6; Dkt No. 88-6; Dkt No. 89-25), and the Joint
Tortfeasor Release, Confidentiality and Indemnity Agreement found in a previous settlement
between Plaintiff and the Tinnyo Parties (Dkt No. 84-10), it is hereby ORDERED that said
Motion, (Dkt No. 84), is DENIED.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ C. Darnell Jones, II
C. Darnell Jones, II J.
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?