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.

John Cullen, et al v. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections

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


January 19, 2011

JOHN CULLEN, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS,
v.
PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Nora Barry Fischer United States District Judge

Judge Fischer Magistrate Judge Bissoon

MEMORANDUM ORDER

Plaintiff John Cullen is one of four state prisoners who, at the time this lawsuit was filed, were all incarcerated at the State Correctional Institution at Pittsburgh ("SCI-Pittsburgh"). Plaintiffs allege that a variety of practices and conditions at SCI-Pittsburgh violate their constitutional rights (Doc. 14). Plaintiffs purport to represent a class of prisoners, and make specific class action allegations in their complaint. This case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Cathy Bissoon for pretrial proceedings, in accordance with the Magistrates Act,

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and Rules 72.C and 72.D of the Local Rules for Magistrates.

On July 23, 2010, Plaintiff Cullen moved this Court to issue an injunction against the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections ("DOC") requiring the DOC to return him to SCI-Pittsburgh after he had been transferred to a different correctional institution. Pl.'s Mot. for Inj. (ECF No. 69) at 2. Various Defendants responded to Plaintiff's motion on July 30, 2010. Def.s' Resp. (ECF No.71). Plaintiff Cullen filed a reply on August 12, 2010.*fn1 (ECF No. 76).

On August 11, 2010, the magistrate judge issued a report and recommendation recommending that Plaintiff Cullen's motion be denied. Report (ECF No. 75) at 1. Additionally, the magistrate judge recommended that Plaintiffs' class action allegations be stricken from the complaint. Id. Plaintiff Perry filed objections to this report, see (ECF Nos. 79 and 80), in which he argued against striking the class action allegations from the complaint. This issue is ripe for disposition.

After de novo review of the pleadings and documents in the case, together with the report and recommendation (ECF No. 75) and Plaintiffs' objections and responses thereto, the following ORDER is entered:

AND NOW, this 19th day of January, 2011,IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff Cullen's motion for injunctive relief (ECF No.69) is DENIED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs' class action allegations be stricken from the

complaint.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the magistrate judge's report and recommendation (ECF No. 75) is adopted as the opinion of this Court on this matter.

cc:JOHN CULLEN BC6256 SCI Pittsburgh PO Box 99991 Pittsburgh, PA 15233 MICHAEL PERRY DA3194 SCI Mercer 801 Butler Pike Pittsburgh, PA 16137 MARTIN STULL GC6165 SCI Laurel Highlands 5706 Glades Pike Somerset, PA 15501 DONALD RUSCH HE7208 SCI Mercer 801 Butler Pike Butler, PA 16137


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.