JACOBS et al v. PALMER et al

Filing 17

ORDER THAT COUNTS TWO AND FIVE OF PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT ARE DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. THE CITY OF CHESTER IS DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE AS A PARTY; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE MICHAEL M. BAYLSON ON 3/10/15. 3/10/15 ENTERED AND E-MAILED.(jl, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA KEN JACOBS and TIMOTHY WILLIAMS, CIVIL ACTION Plaintiffs, v. NO. 14-5797 DELAWARE COUNTY DETECTIVE M. PALMER, DETECTIVE WORRILOW, UNKNOWN DELAWARE COUNTY POLICE OFFICERS, THE COUNTY OF DELAWARE, POLICE COMMISSIONER JOSEPH BAIL, CAPTAIN C. FELL, UNKNOWN CITY OF CHESTER POLICE OFFICERS, and THE CITY OF CHESTER, Defendants. ORDER AND NOW, this 10th day of March, 2015, after consideration of Defendants the City of Chester, Police Commissioner Joseph Bail, and Police Captain C. Fell’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF 9) and Plaintiffs’ Response (ECF 14), and after consideration of Defendants Delaware County Detective M. Palmer, Detective Worrilow, and the County of Delaware’s Partial Motion to Dismiss (ECF 12) and Plaintiffs’ Response (ECF 13), it is hereby ORDERED that 1. both Motions to Dismiss (ECF 9 and 12) are GRANTED; 2. Counts Two and Five of Plaintiffs’ Complaint are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE and with leave to amend; 3. The City of Chester is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as a party; and 4. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 11(b)(2) & (c)(3), Plaintiffs’ counsel is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE within 14 days why sanctions in the form of 1 attorney’s fees and costs should not be awarded to Defendants due to Plaintiffs’ failure to cite to any current, post-Twombly precedential case law. BY THE COURT: /s/ Michael M. Baylson _______________________________ MICHAEL M. BAYLSON, U.S.D.J. O:\CIVIL 14\14-5797 jacobs v. palmer\14cv5797.order.MotionToDismiss.03.09.2015.docx 2

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?