RICHARDSON v. PIERCE et al
ORDER THAT DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT ARE GRANTED. THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL CLOSE THIS CASE FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JOEL H. SLOMSKY ON 10/23/2017. 10/23/2017 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE, E-MAILED.(kp, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
DAVID D. RICHARDSON,
KEVIN PIERCE, et al.,
AND NOW, this 23rd day of October 2017, upon consideration of Plaintiff’s Complaint
(Doc. No. 1), Defendants District Attorney Thomas Hogan and Assistant District Attorney Kevin
Pierce’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. No. 2), Plaintiff’s Response to
Defendants Pierce/Hogan’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. No. 5), Defendants
District Attorney Thomas Hogan and Kevin Pierce’s Reply to Plaintiff’s Brief in Opposition
(Doc. No. 6), Defendant County of Chester’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint Pursuant
to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Doc. No. 7), and in accordance with
the Opinion of the Court issued this day, it is ORDERED as follows:
1. Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. Nos. 2, 7) are GRANTED.
2. The Clerk of Court shall close this case for statistical purposes.
BY THE COURT:
/ s / J oel H. S l om s k y
JOEL H. SLOMSKY, 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?