KALAN et al v. FARMERS & MERCHANTS TRUST COMPANY OF CHAMBERSBURG et al

Filing 228

ORDER THAT MOTION OF DEFT LAW OFFICES OF SCOTT ALAN ORTH, PA, TO DISMISS IS GRANTED AS TO COUNTS III & COUNT IV; THESE COUNTS ARE DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. WITH RESPECT TO COUNT VII, THE MOTION IS DENIED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE WENDY BEETLESTONE ON 6/2/16. 6/2/16 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED AND MAILED TO UNREPRESENTED PARTIES.(kw, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA HARVEY KALAN, M.D., THE HARVEY KALAN, M.D., INC. EMPLOYEE WELFARE BENEFIT PLAN, PAMELA K. ERDMAN, M.D., THE DE. PAMELA K. ERDMAN, M.D., INC. EMPLOYEE WELFARE BENEFIT PLAN, GRETCHEN CASTELLANO, DR. MARTIN ZENNI, DR. ELISSA ZENNI and THE M&E ZENNI INC., WELFARE BENEFIT PLAN, Plaintiffs, CIVIL ACTION NO. 15-1435 v. FARMERS & MERCHANTS TRUST COMPANY OF CHAMBERSBURG, LAWRENCE KORESKO, KORESKO FINANCIAL, LLP, FREEDOM BROKERS, LLC, PENNMONT BENEFITS, INC., DEON DANIEL, LINCOLN NATIONAL CORPORATION, SAMUELS, YOELIN KANTOR, LLP, JEFFREY NIEMAN, LOCKE LORD BISSELL & LIDDELL, LLP, ANDERSON KILL & OLICK, P.C., CHAPLIN & DRYSDALE, GATES HALBRUNER & HATCH, CHRISTIE PARABUE MORTEN & YOUNG, JEFFERSON GOVERNMENT RELATIONS, THEODORE HOBSON, BONNIE KORESKO and JOHN DOE COMPANIES 1-50, Defendants. ORDER AND NOW, this 2nd day of June, 2016, upon consideration of Defendant Law Offices of Scott Alan Orth, P.A.’s (“SAO”) Motion to Dismiss [ECF Nos. 187-88], Plaintiffs’ Response in Opposition thereto [ECF No. 196], and Defendant’s Reply in Support thereof [ECF No. 206], IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. The motion is GRANTED as to Counts III (ERISA violations) and IV (aiding and abetting fiduciary breach); these counts are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 2. With respect to Count VII (fiduciary breach and malpractice), the motion is DENIED. BY THE COURT: /S/WENDY BEETLESTONE, J. _______________________________ WENDY BEETLESTONE, J. 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?