JONES v. PENNSYLVANIA STATE POLICE et al
ORDER THAT DEFTS PENNSYLVANIA STATE POLICE ("PSP") & MIKE TINNENY'S PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS PLFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT IS GRANTED IN PART & DENIED IN PART AS FOLLOWS: THE MOTION TO DISMISS THE PHRA CLAIMS AGAINST THE PSP IS GRANTED. COUNT TWO IS DISMISSED AGAINST THE PSP, ETC. SIGNED BY HONORABLE WENDY BEETLESTONE ON 12/21/16. 12/22/16 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(kw, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
PENNSYLVANIA STATE POLICE,
CRAIG ACORD AND MIKE TINNENY,
AND NOW, this 21st day of December, 2016, upon consideration Defendants
Pennsylvania State Police (“PSP”) and Mike Tinneny’s [ECF No. 19] Partial Motion to Dismiss
the Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint, and the opposition thereto [ECF No. 20], IT IS
ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows:
(1) The motion to dismiss the PHRA claims against the PSP is GRANTED. Count
Two is DISMISSED against the PSP.
(2) The motion to dismiss the Title VII and PHRA disparate treatment sex
discrimination claims against the PSP and Tinneny is GRANTED. The disparate
treatment claims in Count One and Count Two are DISMISSED.
(3) The motion to dismiss the Title VII retaliation claims against the PSP and
Tinneny, and the remaining PHRA retaliation claim against Tinneny is DENIED.
(4) The motion to dismiss the Title VII hostile work environment claims against the
PSP and Tinneny, and the remaining PHRA hostile work environment claims
against Tinneny is DENIED.
(5) The motion to dismiss the PHRA accomplice claims against Tinneny is DENIED.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Wendy Beetlestone
WENDY BEETLESTONE, 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?