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.

Yagla v. Simon

United States District Court, Western District of Pennsylvania

March 24, 2015

BART MAVERICK YAGLA, JR., Plaintiff,
v.
KENNETH SIMON; CITY OF PITTSBURGH; and COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY, Defendants.

Lisa Pupo Lenihan Magistrate Judge

MEMORANDUM ORDER

Arthur J. Schwab United States District Judge

Plaintiff commenced the above-captioned case at Civil Action No. 2:14-cv-181 by filing a Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis on February 10, 2014. (ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff’s Motion was granted on February 13, 2014 and the Clerk was directed to file the Complaint. The case was referred to Magistrate Judge Lenihan for pretrial proceedings in accordance with the Magistrate Judges Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and Rules 72.C and 72.D of the Local Rules of Court.

The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 68) filed on March 3, 2015, recommended that the Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint filed by the City of Pittsburgh (ECF No. 55) be granted, and the consolidated Motion to Dismiss and/or to Strike portions of the Second Amended Complaint filed by the County of Allegheny (ECF No. 57) be granted as to the County's Motion to Dismiss and denied as to the County's Motion to Strike. It was further recommended that certain § 1983 claims be dismissed with prejudice and that certain § 1983 claims be dismissed without prejudice as discussed in the Report and Recommendation. Service was made on the pro se Plaintiff at his address of record, and on counsel of record by electronic mail. The parties were informed that in accordance with the Magistrate Judges Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and (C), and Local Rule of Court 72.D.2, the parties had fourteen (14) days from the date of service to file objections to the Report and Recommendation. No objections were filed.

After review of the pleadings, documents in the case, together with the Report and Recommendation, the following Order is entered:

AND NOW, this 24th day of March 2015, it is hereby ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint filed by the City of Pittsburgh (ECF No. 55) is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the consolidated Motion to Dismiss and/or to Strike portions of the Second Amended Complaint filed by the County of Allegheny (ECF No. 57) is GRANTED as to the County's Motion to Dismiss and DENIED as to the County's Motion to Strike.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the following § 1983 claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE:

(i) alleged violations of the Fifth Amendment;

(ii) alleged violations of the Eighth Amendment;

(iii) alleged violations of the Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause;

(iv) alleged violations of the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process clause arising from:

(a) the withdrawal of a potential plea offer; (b) the Commonwealth’s reliance on officer Scarpane’s testimony; (c) the nolle prossing of Plaintiff’s criminal charges; and (d) the violation of a Rule of Professional Responsibility; and

(v) alleged violations of the Fourth Amendment arising from: (a) Plaintiff’s false arrest; (b) Plaintiff’s false imprisonment; and (c) a judicial officer’s probable cause determination.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the following § 1983 claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE and that Plaintiff shall have until April 17, 2015 to file an amended complaint as to these claims only:

(i) Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment malicious prosecution claim;

(ii) Plaintiff’s Fourteenth Amendment due process claim premised upon an alleged fabrication of evidence and/or Brady violation; and

(iii) Plaintiff’s municipal liability claims.

The Court will dismiss these claims with prejudice if Plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint by the April 17, 2015 deadline.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 68) of Magistrate Judge Lenihan, dated March 3, 2015, is adopted as the Opinion of 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.