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.

Frank T. Perano, Doing Business As Gsp Management Company v. Sean Arbaugh

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


March 24, 2011

FRANK T. PERANO, DOING BUSINESS AS GSP MANAGEMENT COMPANY,
PLAINTIFF
v.
SEAN ARBAUGH, RANDY KING AND LEE MCDONNELL DEFENDANTS

The opinion of the court was delivered by: James Knoll Gardner United States District Judge

ORDER

NOW, this 24th day of March, 2011, upon consideration of the following documents:

(1) Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint, which motion was filed on June 11, 2010; together with Brief in Support of Defendants' Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint, which brief was filed June 11, 2010;

(2) Plaintiff's Brief in Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, which brief was filed July 2, 2010;

(3) Defendants' Reply Brief in Support of Their Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint, which reply brief was filed on July 29, 2010; upon consideration of the pleadings, exhibits, and record papers; and for the reasons articulated in the accompanying Opinion,

IT IS ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss is granted in part and denied in part.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss the claims in Count I of plaintiff's Amended Complaint alleging that defendants violated plaintiff's procedural due process rights, is granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff's procedural due process claim is dismissed from Count I of the Amended Complaint with prejudice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss the claims in Count I of plaintiff's Amended Complaint alleging that defendants violated plaintiff's Equal Protection rights and violated his First Amendment free speech rights by retaliating against him for exercising those rights, is granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff's Equal Protection claims and First Amendment free speech retaliation claims are dismissed from Count I of the Amended Complaint without prejudice for plaintiff to file a more specific second amended complaint, consistent with the accompanying Opinion, by April 22, 2011.*fn1

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss Count II of plaintiff's Amended Complaint alleging that defendants conspired to deprive plaintiff of his Constitutional rights, is granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Count II is dismissed from the Amended Complaint with prejudice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss Count III of plaintiff's Amended Complaint alleging intentional interference with contractual relations, is granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Count III is dismissed from the Amended Complaint with prejudice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to dismiss of defendant of Lee McDonnell is denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiff's request for injunctive relief is denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss on the ground of abstention is denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that in the event plaintiff does not file a second amended complaint by April 22, 2011, plaintiff's remaining Equal Protection and First Amendment free speech retaliation claims may be dismissed for lack of prosecution.*fn2

BY THE COURT:


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.