SMITH v. WENEROWICZ et al
Filing
54
ORDER THAT DEFTS' MOTIONS TO DISMISS (ECF NOS. 41, 42, AND 46) ARE GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. DEFTS' MOTIONS ARE DENIED ONLY INSOFAR AS PLFF. HAS STATED A CLAIM FOR DELIBERATE INDIFFERENCE TO ASBESTOS EXPOSURE AGAINST DEFTS. MICHA EL WENEROWICZ, JAMES MISSTISHIN SR., AND CHRISTOPHER H. OPPMAN. ALL OTHER CLAIMS AND DEFENDANTS ARE DISMISSED FOR THE REASONS SET FORTH IN THE ACCOMPANYING MEMORANDUM.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE C. DARNELL JONES, II ON 6/22/17. 6/23/17 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED TO COUNSEL, 1 COPY TO LEGAL BIN.(pr, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
KARRIE SMITH,
Plaintiff,
:
:
:
v.
:
:
MICHAEL WENEROWICZ, et al., :
Defendants.
:
CIVIL ACTION
NO. 15-1845
ORDER
AND NOW, this 22nd day of June, 2017, upon consideration of Defendants’ Motions to
Dismiss (ECF Nos. 41, 42, and 46), Plaintiff’s responses thereto (Dkt No. 43, 47, and 48), and
counsels’ oral arguments presented on June 19, 2017, it is hereby ORDERED that said Motions
are GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. Defendants’ motions are denied only
insofar as Plaintiff has stated a claim for deliberate indifference to asbestos exposure against
Defendants Michael Wenerowicz, James Misstishin Sr., and Christopher H. Oppman. All other
claims and defendants are dismissed for the reasons set forth in the accompanying memorandum.
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?