LLOYD v. MANBEL DEVCO I LP et al

Filing 90

ORDER THAT THE MOTION TO DISMISS FILED BY BENJAMIN NOVAK, ESQ. AND FOWLER HIRTZEL MCNULTY & SPAULDING LLC, ECF NO. 71 , IS GRANTED. ALL CLAIMS AGAINST BENJAMIN NOVAK, ESQ. AND FOWLER HIRTZEL MCNULTY & SPAULDING LLC ARE DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE AND T HEY ARE TERMINATED AS DEFENDANTS. THE MOTION TO DISMISS FILED BY THE LANCASTER COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY, ECF NO. 74 , IS GRANTED. ALL CLAIMS AGAINST THE LANCASTER COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY ARE DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE AND IT IS TERMINATED AS A DEFEND ANT. THE MOTION TO DISMISS FILED BY MANBEL DEVCO III, LP, D/B/A ECLIPSE AT BELMONT (MANBEL), AUDREY CALECA, AND CAROLINE SCHOMPERT, ECF NO. 75 , IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART AS FOLLOWS; ETC. AS HEREIN. THE MOTION TO DISMISS FILED BY GREENS CAPES LANDSCAPE CONSTRUCTION, LLC, ECF NO. 83 , IS GRANTED. ALL CLAIMS AGAINST GREENSCAPES LANDSCAPE CONSTRUCTION, LLC ARE DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE AND IT IS TERMINATED AS A DEFENDANT. PLAINTIFFS MOTIONS TO AMEND AND TO STRIKE, ECF NOS. 76 , 78 , 79 , 85 , 86 , ARE DENIED. WITHIN FOURTEEN (14) DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS ORDER, MANBEL DEVCO III, LP, AUDREY CALECA, AND CAROLINE SCHOMPERT, SHALL RESPOND TO THE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT. SEE FED. R. CIV. P. 12(A)(4)). ALL PARTIES ARE ADVISED THAT THEY SHOULD NOT ATTACH AS A SEPARATE EXHIBIT ANY PLEADING OR OPINION FILED IN THE ABOVE-CAPTIONED ACTION, BUT SHOULD INSTEAD REFER TO THE ECF DOCKET NUMBER. ADDITIONALLY, DEFENDANTS ARE ADVISED THAT ALL FUTURE FILINGS MUST PROPERLY SEPARATE AND IDENTIFY ATTACHED EXHIBITS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE LOCAL RULES OF THIS COURT. SIGNED BY DISTRICT JUDGE JOSEPH F. LEESON, JR ON 3/4/25.3/4/25 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(mas)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
____________________________________
SUSAN LLOYD,
Plaintiff,

:
:
:
v.
:
:
MANBEL DEVCO III LP, et al.,
:
Defendants.
:
_____________________________________

No. 5:23-cv-2261

ORDER
AND NOW, this 4th day of March, 2025, for the reasons set forth in the Opinion issued
this date, as well as any limitations discussed therein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
1.

The Motion to Dismiss filed by Benjamin Novak, Esq. and Fowler Hirtzel

McNulty & Spaulding LLC, ECF No. 71, is GRANTED. All claims against Benjamin Novak,
Esq. and Fowler Hirtzel McNulty & Spaulding LLC are DISMISSED with prejudice and they
are TERMINATED as defendants.
2.

The Motion to Dismiss filed by the Lancaster County Housing Authority, ECF

No. 74, is GRANTED. All claims against the Lancaster County Housing Authority are
DISMISSED with prejudice and it is TERMINATED as a defendant.
3.

The Motion to Dismiss filed by Manbel Devco III, LP, d/b/a Eclipse at Belmont

(“Manbel”), Audrey Caleca, and Caroline Schompert, ECF No. 75, is GRANTED in part and
DENIED in part as follows:
A.

The FHA, RA, PHRA claim (heading VI) against Manbel Devco III, LP,

Audrey Caleca, and Caroline Schompert may proceed;
B.

The UTPCPL claim (heading III) against Manbel Devco III, LP only, may

proceed;
C.

The negligence claim (Count IV) against Manbel Devco III, LP, Audrey

Caleca, and Caroline Schompert may proceed;
D.
proceed; and

The nuisance claim (heading V) against Manbel Devco III, LP, only, may

E.

The breach of contract claim (heading X) against Manbel Devco III, LP

may proceed.
F.

All other claims against Manbel Devco III, LP, Audrey Caleca, and

Caroline Schompert are DISMISSED with prejudice.
4.

The Motion to Dismiss filed by Greenscapes Landscape Construction, LLC , ECF

No. 83, is GRANTED. All claims against Greenscapes Landscape Construction, LLC are
DISMISSED with prejudice and it is TERMINATED as a defendant.
5.

Plaintiff’s Motions to Amend and to Strike, ECF Nos. 76, 78, 79, 85, 86, are

DENIED.
6.

Within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Order, Manbel Devco III, LP,

Audrey Caleca, and Caroline Schompert, shall respond to the Second Amended Complaint. See
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(4)).
7.

All parties are advised that they should not attach as a separate exhibit any

pleading or opinion filed in the above-captioned action, but should instead refer to the ECF
docket number. Additionally, Defendants are advised that all future filings must properly
separate and identify attached exhibits in compliance with the Local Rules of this Court. 1

BY THE COURT:
/s/ Joseph F. Leeson, Jr.
JOSEPH F. LEESON, JR.
United States District Judge

1

See E.D. Pa. L.R. 5.1.2(5)(b) (“Each document filed as an exhibit must be filed as a
separately numbered attachment to the main document and must be clearly titled with an
objective description of the document (e.g., 6/14/19 Deposition of John Doe; 10/14/21 Letter
from Smith to Jones; 3/15/20-3/23/20 Email Thread between Doe and Roe) so that the nature of
the exhibit and its relevance are clearly discernible without the need to open the file.” (emphasis
added))