IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
February 22, 2013
RAYMOND S. PRATT, PLAINTIFF,
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Berle M. Schiller, J.
AND NOW, this 22nd day of February, 2013, upon consideration of Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, Defendants' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and Response in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment, Plaintiff's opposition thereto, Plaintiff's Response to Defendants' Concise Statement of Material Facts, and Plaintiff's Rooker-Feldman Preclusion in Reply to Defendants' Opposition, and for the reasons stated in this Court's Memorandum dated February 22, 2013, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff's motion (Document No. 48) is DENIED.
2. Defendants' motion (Document No. 49) is GRANTED. The motion is GRANTED as to all claims against the City of Philadelphia. As to Officers Brinson and Rios, the motion is GRANTED as to the § 1985(3), intentional infliction of emotional distress, Fifth Amendment, Sixth Amendment, Eighth Amendment, Fourteenth Amendment, § 1986, and § 1988(a) claims.
3. The federal claims for false arrest, malicious prosecution, and excessive force against Officers Brinson and Rios remain unaffected by this Order.
4. The common law conspiracy, concerted action, assault, battery, false arrest, unlawful detention, and malicious prosecution claims against Officers Brinson and Rios remain unaffected by this Order.
BY THE COURT:
© 1992-2013 VersusLaw Inc.