IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
May 26, 2009
RODNEY BURNS, PLAINTIFF,
PA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ET AL, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Berle M. Schiller, J.
AND NOW, this 26thday of May, 2009, upon consideration of Defendants' Second Motion for Summary Judgment, Plaintiff's Second Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, the responses thereto, and for the reasons discussed in the Court's Memorandum of May 26, 2009, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1. Defendants' motion for summary judgment (Document No. 73) is GRANTED as to Plaintiff's First, Second, Third, Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Claims for Relief and DENIED in part as to Plaintiff's Fourth Claim for Relief.
2. Plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment (Document No. 76) is GRANTED in part as to Plaintiff's Fourth Claim for Relief and otherwise DENIED.
3. The Court DECLARES that Defendant Canino's failure to independently assess the reliability and credibility of the confidential informants whose testimony she relied upon in assessing Plaintiff's inmate account violated the procedural due process rights Plaintiff was entitled to given his protected property interest in the security of his inmate account.
4. The clerk of court is directed to close this case.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.