Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Burella v. City of Philadelphia

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA


September 30, 2009

JILL BURELLA, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PARENT AND NATURAL GUARDIAN OF BETH ANN BURELLA, DANIELLE BURELLA AND NICHOLAS BURELLA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, ET AL. DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Cynthia M. Rufe, J.

ORDER

AND NOW, this 30th day of September 2009, upon consideration of the Third Circuit's decision in this matter,*fn1 the Motion for Summary Judgment by Defendants City of Philadelphia, Robert Reamer, Charles Bloom and Francis Gramlich [Document No. 114], the Response [Document No. 116], the Reply [Document No. 117] and the Sur-reply [Document No. 121], and in accordance with the attached Memorandum Opinion, it is hereby

ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART, as follows:

1. Defendants Reamer, Bloom and Gramlich's Motion is GRANTED as to Plaintiff 's claims under § 1983 both on her behalf and on behalf of Beth Ann, Danielle and Nicholas Burella. Accordingly, Counts I and IV are DISMISSED;

2. Defendant City of Philadelphia's Motion is GRANTED as to Plaintiff's claims under § 1983 both on her behalf and on behalf of Beth Ann, Danielle and Nicholas Burella. Accordingly, Counts II and III are DISMISSED;

3. Defendants Reamer, Bloom and Gramlich's Motion is GRANTED as to Plaintiff 's claims under the Pennsylvania Constitution both on her behalf and on behalf of Beth Ann, Danielle and Nicholas Burella. Accordingly, Count V is DISMISSED;

4. Defendants Reamer, Bloom and Gramlich's Motion is GRANTED as to Plaintiff 's claims under Pennsylvania state tort law both on her behalf and on behalf of Beth Ann, Danielle and Nicholas Burella. Accordingly, Count VI is DISMISSED;

5. Defendants Reamer, Bloom and Gramlich's Motion is GRANTED as to Plaintiff 's claims under Pennsylvania law for negligence, negligent infliction of emotional distress and intentional infliction of emotional distress on behalf of Beth Ann, Danielle and Nicholas Burella. Accordingly, those claims are DISMISSED; and

6. Defendants Reamer, Bloom and Gramlich's Motion is DENIED as to Plaintiff 's claim under Pennsylvania law for intentional infliction of emotional distress on her own behalf.

Plaintiff shall SHOW CAUSE within fourteen (14) days as to why Defendants John Does I through IV should not be dismissed.

It is so ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.