J.H. v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
Filing
29
ORDER THAT DEFT THOMAS O'NEILL'S MOTION TO REMAND (DOC. NO. 22) IS GRANTED. DEFTS' MOTION TO DISMISS (DOC. NO. 4) IS DEEMED MOOT. THIS ACTION IS REMANDED TO THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PHILA. COUNTY FOR ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS; & THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL MARK THIS CASE CLOSED FOR ALL PURPOSES, INCLUDING STATISTICS. SIGNED BY HONORABLE GENE E.K. PRATTER ON 1/12/18. 1/17/18 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(kw, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
J.H.,
Plaintiff,
v.
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al.,
Defendants.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
CIVIL ACTION
NO. 17-3520
ORDER
AND NOW, this 12th day of January, 2018, upon consideration of Defendant Thomas
O’Neill’s Motion to Remand (Doc. No. 22), the Response of Defendants City of Philadelphia,
Charles Ramsey, and Richard Ross (Doc. No. 24), and Plaintiff’s Response in Support (Doc. No.
25), it is HEREBY ORDERED as follows:
1. The Motion to Remand (Doc. No. 22) is GRANTED.
2. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 4) is deemed MOOT.
3. This action is REMANDED to the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County
for all further proceedings; and
4. The Clerk of Court shall MARK THIS CASE CLOSED for all purposes,
including statistics.
BY THE COURT:
S/Gene E.K. Pratter
GENE E.K. PRATTER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?