FISHER v. KING et al

Filing 62

ORDER THAT THE 43 MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF DEFENDANT, MEGAN L. KING, ESQ. IS GRANTED; THE 44 MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF DEFENDANT, ERIC ZIMMERMAN, IS GRANTED; PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; AND THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL MARK THIS MATTER CLOSED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JEFFREY L. SCHMEHL ON 9/22/17. 9/22/17 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(mas, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA JOHN R. FISHER, Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. 15-6134 v. MEGAN L. KING, ESQ., Individually and in her Official Capacity as Assistant District Attorney for Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, and ERIC ZIMMERMAN, Individually and in his Official Capacity as Detective for Northern Lancaster County Pennsylvania Regional Police Department, Defendants. ORDER AND NOW, this 22nd day of September, 2017, after review of the Motion for Summary Judgment of Defendant King (Docket No. 43) and the Motion for Summary Judgment of Defendant Zimmerman (Docket No. 44), the Memoranda of Law in support of both, as well as Plaintiff’s opposition thereto and Defendants’ replies, and after oral argument being held on said motions, it is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1. The Motion for Summary Judgment of Defendant, Megan L. King, Esq. is GRANTED; 2. The Motion for Summary Judgment of Defendant, Eric Zimmerman, is GRANTED; 3. Plaintiff’s Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice; and 4. The Clerk of Court shall mark this matter closed. BY THE COURT: /s/ Jeffrey L. Schmehl Jeffrey L. Schmehl, 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?