Davis v. John and Jane Does et al
ORDER (memorandum filed previously as separate docket entry) - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 96 Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is granted; Clerk directed to enter judgment in favor of Defendance Tice, Harrish, Plummer, Smith, Johnston, Mc Coy, Coley, Houser, German, Walters, Fogel, Thomas, Oliver, Barnacle, Smeal and Wetzel and against Plaintiff on all remaining claims; Clerk directed to close this case. (See Order for further/complete details.) Signed by Honorable Matthew W. Brann on 3/31/2021. (lg) (Main Document 109 replaced on 3/31/2021 - to correct date) (lg). Modified on 3/31/2021 (lg).
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
JOHN and JANE DOES, et al.,
MARCH 31, 2021
In accordance with the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, IT IS
HEREBY ORDERED that:
Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, Doc. 96, is GRANTED;
Plaintiff’s state law claims of assault, battery, negligence, and negligent
infliction of emotional distress are DISMISSED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE for lack of jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
Defendants John and Jane Does, Internal Security Officers, Internal
Intelligence Officers, Gang Affiliation Officers, Post Officers, Miller,
Chaplain John Doe, SNU Unit Managers, Program Review Committee
Members, Deputy of Security, Deputy of Centralized Services, Deputy
of Facility Management, and Gang Unit Supervisors Central Office are
DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE;
The Clerk of Court is directed to ENTER JUDGMENT in favor of
Defendants Tice, Harrish, Plummer, Smith, Johnston, McCoy, Coley,
Houser, German, Walters, Fogel, Thomas, Oliver, Barnacle, Smeal, and
Wetzel and as against Plaintiff on all claims remaining; and
The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this matter.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Matthew W. Brann
Matthew W. Brann
United States District Judge
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?