THOMPSON v. HENS-GRECO et al
Filing
144
MEMORANDUM ORDER entering judgment in form of dismissal of the all remaining federal claims against all remaining defendants; and declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over any remaining state law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c) in order to assure that plaintiff Dwayne Thompson continues to have appropriate recourse available in the ongoing domestic matters involving RMT. All as more fully set forth in the Memorandum Order. Signed by Judge David S. Cercone on 2/20/19. (mwm)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Dwayne Thompson, individually, and on
behalf of his minor daughter “RMT” and
Pamela McDeavitt,
Plaintiffs,
v.
Kathryn M. Hens-Greco; Kimberly Berkeley
Clark, Krista Abram; Shane Mock; Jonathan
Voelker; Pernille Frankmar; Voelker &
Colton, LLC; Lauren Darbouze; Reserve
Township Police; Brian Tully; Fred Boory Jr;
Pittsburgh Municipal Court; Barbara Clements;
Allegheny County; Patrick Quinn; Christopher
Connors; Geraldine M. Redic; Claire Capristo;
Allegheny County Sheriff’s Department;
Anthony Fratto; Holly Zemba; Allegheny County
Department of Court Records; Allegheny County
Office of Children and Youth Services;
Bruce Noel; Brynn Alpee; McKeesport Area
School District; Fifth Judicial District; and
John and Jane Does, 1-10,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
2:16cv1100
Electronic Filing
District Judge Cercone
Magistrate Judge Lenihan
ECF Nos. 77, 136
MEMORANDUM ORDER
AND NOW, this 20th day of February, 2018, the court having entered opinions and orders
dismissing all claims against all defendants save Krista Abram and Shane Mock and it being
readily apparent from those dispositions and the record that plaintiffs' constitutional rights were
not violated by the defendants' collective conduct underlying the averments of the Third
Amended Complaint, IT IS ORDERED that judgment in form of dismissal of the all remaining
federal claims be, and the same hereby is, entered; and
IT FURTHER IS ORDERED that the court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction
over any remaining state law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c). Accordingly, final
judgment pursuant to Rule 58 will be entered in favor of all defendants and against plaintiffs.
The record lacks any basis to assume or infer that defendants Krista Abram and/or Shane
Mock acted under color of state law or entered into a conspiracy with any of the defendants who
did perform functions under color of state law. Consequently, while Krista Abram and/or Shane
Mock may have gamed the system as plaintiffs have alleged, the record as now developed does
not present a colorable basis to advance a claim that they did so in violation of 42 U.S.C. §§
1983, 1985 or 1986. Consequently, the court cannot proceed further on the federal claims
against these defendants or render any award on such claims.
Moreover, any remaining claim under state law is a matter that is committed in the first
instance to the family/domestic relations division of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny
County. Of course, its handling of the domestic relations matters between plaintiff Dwayne
Thompson and Krista Abram with regard to RMT is equitable and subject to modification.
Consequently, the court will decline to exercise jurisdiction over any remaining state law claims
in order to assure that plaintiff Dwayne Thompson continues to have appropriate recourse
available in the ongoing domestic matters involving RMT.
s/David Stewart Cercone
David Stewart Cercone
Senior United States District Judge
2
cc:
Dwayne Thompson
1013 Coal Street
Pittsburgh, PA 15221
(Via First Class Mail)
Caroline Liebenguth, Esquire
Dennis J. Roman, Esquire
Charlene S. Seibert, Esquire
Timothy R. Stienstraw, Esquire
Lauren D. Darbouze, Esquire
Ashley N. Rodgers, Esquire
Daniel R. Bentz, Esquire
Benjamin T.S. Trodden, Esquire
Lisa G. Michel, Esquire
Anthony G. Sanchez, Esquire
(Via CM/ECF Electronic Mail)
3
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?