Southerton v. Borough of Honesdale et al

Filing 51

ORDER (memorandum filed previously as separate docket entry). Defendants Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 39) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows:(1) The Wage Payment and Collection Law claim in Count III of the SecondAmended Complaint is DISMISS ED with prejudice.(2) The First Amendment Petition Clause retaliation claim in Count V of theSecond Amended Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice.(3) Plaintiff has twenty-one (21) days from the date of entry of this Order tofile a further amended complaint to properly plead his First AmendmentPetition Clause retaliation claim (Count V); otherwise, that claim will be dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Honorable A. Richard Caputo on 2/23/18. (dw)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
RICHARD SOUTHERTON,
Plaintiff,

NO. 3:17-CV-0165

v.

(JUDGE CAPUTO)

BOROUGH OF HONESDALE, et
al.,
Defendants.
ORDER
NOW, this 23rd day of February, 2018, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 39) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part
as follows:
(1)

The Wage Payment and Collection Law claim in Count III of the Second
Amended Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice.

(2)

The First Amendment Petition Clause retaliation claim in Count V of the
Second Amended Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice.

(3)

Plaintiff has twenty-one (21) days from the date of entry of this Order to
file a further amended complaint to properly plead his First Amendment
Petition Clause retaliation claim (Count V); otherwise, that claim will be
dismissed with prejudice.
/s/ A. Richard Caputo
A. Richard Caputo
United States District Judge