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.

Bullock v. Bimbo Bakeries USA

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


April 27, 2010

WILLIAM C. BULLOCK PLAINTIFF
v.
BIMBO BAKERIES USA AND ANGIE LASHOMB DEFENDANTS

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge Conner

ORDER

AND NOW, this 27th day of April, 2010, upon consideration of the report of the magistrate judge (Doc. 24), recommending that the court grant the motion (Doc. 9) for judgment on the pleadings filed by defendants Carlisle Foods, Inc.*fn1 and Angie LaShomb, and upon further consideration of the objections*fn2 (Doc. 27) filed by plaintiff, wherein plaintiff renews his arguments that the United States of America does not have the power to impose income tax upon its citizens and that the Internal Revenue Service may not impose a levy on the wages of non-governmental employees,*fn3 and plaintiff specifically objects to the magistrate judge's conclusion that plaintiff could not properly maintain a private cause of action for theft under Pennsylvania criminal statutes,*fn4 nor could plaintiff maintain claims under the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the United States Constitution against private actors,*fn5 and following an independent review of the record, it appearing that plaintiff brought the instant action to enjoin defendants from continuing to garnish his wages and to recover damages under Pennsylvania's criminal statutes relating to theft and for asserted violations of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and it further appearing that defendants contend that judgment on the pleadings is appropriate because plaintiff's claims are preempted by section 301 of the Labor-Management Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 185, that plaintiff has improperly attempted to bring claims that are premised under state- law criminal statutes, that plaintiff's constitutional claims are not cognizable because they are brought against private parties rather than governmental actors, and that 26 U.S.C. § 6332 of the Internal Revenue Code clearly insulates these private defendants from suit for complying with an Internal Revenue Service tax levy, and the court concluding that the instant case presents no issues of fact to be resolved, and that defendants are entitled to judgment as a matter of law, see Rosenau v. Unifund Corp., 539 F.3d 218, 221 (3d Cir. 2008) ("Under Rule 12(c), judgment will not be granted unless the movant clearly establishes that no material issue of fact remains to be resolved and that he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." (quoting Jablonski v. Pan Am. World Airways, Inc., 863 F.2d 289, 290 (3d Cir. 1988))), it is hereby ORDERED that:

1. The report of the magistrate judge (Doc. 24) is ADOPTED.

2. Defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings (Doc. 9) is GRANTED.

3. The Clerk of Court is instructed to enter JUDGMENT in favor of defendants and against plaintiff on all claims.

4. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.

CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER United States District Judge


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.