NACE et al v. PENNRIDGE SCHOOL DISTRICT et al

Filing 121

ORDER THAT DEFENDANT FAITH CHRISTIAN ACADEMY'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS DENIED. DEFENDANTS CLYMER AND HOLLENBACH'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT TO PRECLUDE PUNITIVE DAMAGES IS DENIED. DEFENDANT FAITH CHRISTIAN ACADEMY'S MOTION IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE THE TESTIMONY OF BRAD M. JACKSON IS DENIED; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE WENDY BEETLESTONE ON 3/29/19. 3/29/19 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND E-MAILED, MAILED TO PRO SE. (JL)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
ELIZABETH ANN NACE,

CIVIL ACTION

Plaintiff,
v.
NO. 15-333
FAITH CHRISTIAN ACADEMY, RYAN
CLYMER AND RUSSELL
HOLLENBACH,
Defendants.
ORDER
AND NOW, this 29th day of March, 2019,
1. WHEREAS, on August 6, 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit vacated
and remanded this Court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Defendants on Plaintiff’s
negligence per se claim, and directed this Court to “assess whether there exists a genuine dispute
of material fact on the other required elements for a negligence per se claim,” see Nace v.
Pennridge Sch. Dist., 744 Fed.Appx. 58, 64 (3d Cir. Aug. 6, 2018);
2. WHEREAS, the vacatur of this Court’s summary judgment decision rendered
Defendant’s Motion to Preclude Testimony of Plaintiff’s Expert Brad M. Jackman ripe for
adjudication;
3. WHEREAS, the Court has considered the parties’ supplemental briefing, Defendant
Faith Christian Academy’s Supplemental Memorandum in Support of Summary Judgment (ECF
No. 112); Plaintiff’s Supplemental Memorandum in Opposition thereto (ECF No. 115);
Defendant Faith Christian Academy’s Reply in Support thereof (ECF No. 116); Plaintiff’s SurReply in Opposition thereto (ECF No. 119); Defendants Ryan Clymer and Russell Hollenbach’s

Supplemental Memorandum in Support of Summary Judgment (ECF No. 111); and Plaintiff’s
Supplemental Memorandum in Opposition thereto (ECF No. 114);
IT IS ORDERED that:
1.

With respect to Plaintiff’s negligence per se claim, Defendant Faith Christian
Academy’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 53) is DENIED;

2.

Defendants Clymer and Hollenbach’s motion for summary judgment to preclude
punitive damages (ECF No. 52) is DENIED;

3.

Defendant Faith Christian Academy’s motion in limine to preclude the testimony
of Brad M. Jackson, Esq. (ECF No. 51) is DENIED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/Wendy Beetlestone, J.
_______________________________
WENDY BEETLESTONE, J.

2