ROSE v. DOWD
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THAT DEFENDANTS MOTION IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART AS OUTLINED HEREIN. PLAINTIFFS REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO AMEND HIS COMPLAINT AS TO COUNT TWO IS GRANTED. PLAINTIFF MAY AMEND HIS COMPLAINT TO SUPPLEMENT HIS ALLEGATIONS OF SPECIAL HARM ON OR BEFORE 8/1/17. SIGNED BY CHIEF JUDGE PETRESE B. TUCKER ON 7/14/17. 7/14/17 ENTERED AND COPIES EMAILED.(rf, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
AND NOW, this __14th___ day of July, 2017, upon consideration of Defendant John
Dowd’s Motion to Dismiss Complaint (Doc. 12), Plaintiff Peter Rose’s Memorandum of Law in
Opposition to Defendant John Dowd’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 16), the Reply Brief in Support
of Defendant John Dowd’s Motion to Dismiss Complaint (Doc. 18), and Oral Argument held
before Chief Judge Petrese B. Tucker on December 19, 2016, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED
AND DECREED that Defendant’s Motion is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART
1. Defendant’s Motion is DENIED as to Count One;
2. Defendant’s Motion is DENIED as to Count Two; and
3. Defendant’s Motion is GRANTED as to Count Three.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s request for leave to amend his Complaint
as to Count Two is GRANTED. Plaintiff may amend his Complaint to supplement his
allegations of special harm on or before Tuesday, August 1, 2017. 1
This Order accompanies the Court’s Memorandum dated July 14, 2017.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Petrese B. Tucker
Hon. Petrese B. Tucker, C.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?