Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Michael Tirado v. Montgomery County

March 29, 2013

MICHAEL TIRADO, PLAINTIFF
v.
MONTGOMERY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, OPERATING AS THE MONTGOMERY COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY; C.O. DAVIS, INDIVIDUALLY AND IN HIS PROFESSIONAL CAPACITY AS A CORRECTIONAL OFFICER AT THE MONTGOMERY COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY; AND C.O. BANKS, INDIVIDUALLY AND IN HIS PROFESSIONAL CAPACITY AS A CORRECTIONAL OFFICER AT THE MONTGOMERY COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, DEFENDANTS



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

ORDER

NOW, this 28th day of March, 2012, upon consideration of the Motion of Defendants Montgomery County, C.O. Davis and C.O. Banks for the Partial Dismissal of Plaintiff's Complaint, which motion was filed together with a memorandum of law on March 9, 2012; upon consideration of Plaintiff's Response in Opposition to Defendants Montgomery County, C.O. Davis and C.O. Banks' for the Partial Dismissal of Plaintiff's Complaint, which response was filed together with a memorandum of law on March 23, 2012; and for the reasons expressed in the accompanying Opinion,

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

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss that portion of Count I of plaintiff's Complaint alleging failure to train and supervise is granted in part and denied in part.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiff's failure to train claim contained in Count I against defendant Montgomery County based upon a "single violation" theory is denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiff's failure to train claim contained in Count I against defendant Montgomery County based upon a "pattern of violations" theory is granted without prejudice for plaintiff to file an amended complaint.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiff's failure to supervise claim contained in Count I against defendant Montgomery County based upon either a "single violation" or a "pattern of violations" theory is granted without prejudice for plaintiff to file an amended complaint.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss Count II of plaintiff's Complaint alleging violation of Article I, § 13 of the Pennsylvania Constitution is granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Count II of plaintiff's Complaint is dismissed with prejudice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss Count III of plaintiff's Complaint alleging a claim of negligence is granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Count III of plaintiff's Complaint is dismissed with prejudice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss defendant Montgomery County and defendants Davis and Banks only in their official capacity, from Counts IV and V of plaintiff's Complaint alleging assault (Count IV) and battery (Count V) is granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant Montgomery County and defendants Davis and Banks only in their official capacity, are dismissed from Counts IV and V of plaintiff's Complaint with prejudice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiff's request for attorneys' fees from Count ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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