NIEMOCZYNSKI et al v. UPPER MOUNT BETHEL TOWNSHIP OF PENNSYLVANIA et al
Filing
30
ORDER THAT THE TOWNSHIP DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS IS GRANTED; THE APONICKS MOTION TO DISMISS IS GRANTED; PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE WITH RESPECT TO ALL CLAIMS AGAINST THE TOWNSHIP DEFENDANTS AND FRAN APONICK; AND ALL CLAIMS AGAINST ROBERT APONICK ARE DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. PLAINTIFFS HAVE TWENTY (20) DAYS IN WHICH TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT. IT IS SO ORDERED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LAWRENCE F. STENGEL ON 1/23/17. 1/24/17 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED. (va, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
LEON NIEMOCZYNSKI, JR., and
NALINA NIEMOCZYNSKI,
Plaintiffs,
v.
UPPER MOUNT BETHEL TOWNSHIP OF
PENNSYLVANIA, et al.,
Defendants.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
CIVIL ACTION
NO. 16-0212
ORDER
AND NOW, this 23rd day of January, 2017, upon consideration of the Motions to
Dismiss by Defendants Upper Mount Bethel Township, Upper Mount Bethel Township
Zoning Board, Robert Cartwright, Maureen Sterner, Robert Collura, Jeffrey Manzi, and
Ronald Angle (“the Township Defendants”) (Docket No. 19) and Robert and Fran
Aponick (Docket Nos. 15, 16, and 17); the Responses in Opposition by Plaintiffs Leon
and Nalina Niemoczynski (Docket Nos. 20 and 21); the Township Defendants’ Reply
(Docket No. 24); and Plaintiffs’ Sur Reply (Docket No. 27), it is hereby ORDERED
that:
1. The Township Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED;
2. The Aponicks’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED;
3. Plaintiffs’ Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE with respect
to all claims against the Township Defendants and Fran Aponick; and
4. All claims against Robert Aponick are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
5. Plaintiffs have twenty (20) days in which to file an Amended Complaint.
It is so ORDERED.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Lawrence F. Stengel
LAWRENCE F. STENGEL, 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?