Lawson v. Dauphin County Work Release et al

Filing 19

ORDER: 1. MJ Saporitos R&R 17 is ADOPTED.2. Dfts unopposed mtn 13 for partial dismissal is GRANTED.3. Pltfs request for injunctive relief is DISMISSED without prejudice.4. Pltfs claims against dfts Dauphin County Work Release Center and Dauphin C ounty Adult Probation are DISMISSED with prejudice.5. Pltfs claims for damages against dfts Adams, Proper, Muza, Marybeth, and Annemarie in their official capacities are DISMISSED with prejudice.6. Pltfs claims for damages against dfts Proper, Muza, Marybeth, and Annemarie in their personal capacities are DISMISSED without prejudice to Pltfs right to amend her first amended complaint 10 to properly state a claim for relief. Pltf shall file a second amended complaint within (21) days of this or der. If Pltf fails to amend her first amended complaint on or before 11/8/16, the claims for damages against dfts Proper, Muza, Marybeth, and Annemarie in their personal capacities shall be dismissed with prejudice.7. This matter is REMANDED to M.J. Saporito for further proceedings.Signed by Honorable William W. Caldwell on 10/18/16. (ma)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA LESLIE M. LAWSON, Plaintiff v. DAUPHIN COUNTY WORK RELEASE, et al., Defendants : : : : CASE NO. 1:15-CV-2450 : : : : ORDER AND NOW, this 18th day of October, 2016, upon consideration of the report and recommendation of Magistrate Judge Joseph F. Saporito, Jr. (Doc. 17), entered on September 15, 2016, to which no objections were filed, and upon independent review of the record, it is ORDERED that: 1. Magistrate Judge Saporito’s report and recommendation is ADOPTED. 2. Defendants’ unopposed motion (Doc. 13) for partial dismissal is GRANTED. 3. Plaintiff’s request for injunctive relief is DISMISSED without prejudice. 4. Plaintiff’s claims against defendants Dauphin County Work Release Center and Dauphin County Adult Probation are DISMISSED with prejudice. 5. Plaintiff’s claims for damages against defendants Adams, Proper, Muza, Marybeth, and Annemarie in their official capacities are DISMISSED with prejudice. 6. Plaintiff’s claims for damages against defendants Proper, Muza, Marybeth, and Annemarie in their personal capacities are DISMISSED without prejudice to Plaintiff’s right to amend her first amended complaint (Doc. 10) to properly state a claim for relief. Plaintiff shall file a second amended complaint within twenty-one (21) days of this order. If Plaintiff fails to amend her first amended complaint on or before November 8, 2016, the claims for damages against defendants Proper, Muza, Marybeth, and Annemarie in their personal capacities shall be dismissed with prejudice. 7. This matter is REMANDED to Magistrate Judge Saporito for further proceedings. 1 /s/ William W. Caldwell William W. Caldwell United States District Judge 1 The September 15, 2016 Report and Recommendation also recommended that defendant Adams be directed to respond to the amended complaint within fourteen days after disposition of the instant motion to dismiss. (See Doc. 17 at 22-23). Because defendant Adams filed his answer (Doc. 18) to Plaintiff’s amended complaint on October 11, 2016, however, this recommendation is moot. 2

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?