- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
DAVIS v. BOROUGH
ANITA BRODY, District Judge
AND NOW, this 21st day of October 2009, upon consideration of Defendant Constable Michael Connor's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. #15) and Plaintiff Warren Davis's Response (Doc. #21), it is ORDERED that Defendant's Motion is DENIED without prejudice.
In addition, in light of the Stipulation of Counsel I approved on June 18, 2009 (Doc. #22), it is further ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants Darby Borough and Officer Matthew Rinderer (Doc. #17) is DENIED as moot.
In the Stipulation of Counsel between Davis and Defendants Darby Borough and Officer Rinderer that I approved, Davis agreed to withdraw with prejudice his claims under the Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments; his claim under the Pennsylvania Constitution; his claim of punitive damages against Darby Borough and Officer Rinderer in his official capacity; and his claim of wrongful and/or false imprisonment against Darby Borough. These were all the claims Defendants Darby Borough and Officer Matthew Rinderer sought to dismiss in their Motion.
Alert