SPADY v. THE BETHLEHEM AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT et al

Filing 58

ORDER THAT DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS DENIED. ACCORDINGLY, THE FOLLOWING CLAIMS REMAIN: A SECTION 1983 CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANT ROGERS; A SECTION 1983 CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANT BASD; A WRONGFUL DEATH CLAIM AGAINST BOTH DEFENDANTS; AND A SURVIVAL ACTION AGAINST BOTH DEFENDANTS. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JOEL H. SLOMSKY ON 7/30/2014. 7/30/2014 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(uh, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
MICA D. SPADY,
Plaintiff,

CIVIL ACTION
NO. 12-6731

v.
THE BETHLEHEM AREA SCHOOL
DISTRICT, et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER

AND NOW, this 30th day of July 2014, upon consideration of the Amended Complaint
(Doc. No. 15), Defendants’ Answer (Doc. No. 16), Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment
(Doc. No. 44), Plaintiff’s Response in Opposition (Doc. No. 48), Defendants’ Reply (Doc.
No. 52), all related filings and exhibits, and in accordance with the Opinion of the Court issued
this day, it is ORDERED as follows:
1.

Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 44) is DENIED.

2.

Accordingly, the following claims remain: a Section 1983 claim against
Defendant Rodgers (Count II); a Section 1983 claim against Defendant BASD
(Count IV); a wrongful death claim against both Defendants (Count VIII); and a
survival action against both Defendants (Count IX)

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Joel H. Slomsky
JOEL H. SLOMSKY, J.