IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
April 14, 2009
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Fullam, Sr. J.
The pro se plaintiff in this case, Eugene Spuglio, is suing a Massachusetts nightclub for personal injuries he allegedly suffered while a patron at that establishment. The defendant filed a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction over the defendant, and, by Order dated March 26, 2009, the defendant's motion was granted. This action was dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction, without prejudice to plaintiff's right to seek relief in an appropriate court.
Plaintiff has now filed a "Motion for a Non-Pro-Tonk Evidence Hearing." In the context of this case, plaintiff's motion makes no sense. The motion alleges, in great detail, plaintiff's employment history, and his expertise in all matters related to the computer field, the Internet, web-pages, etc. But these allegations have nothing to do with the quite obvious fact that this federal court in Pennsylvania cannot exercise jurisdiction over the defendant in Massachusetts. If plaintiff wishes to recover for his injuries, he must pursue his claim in the appropriate state or federal court in Massachusetts.
An Order follows.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.