From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lord v. County

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Jan 5, 2010
Civil Action No. 08-213 Erie (W.D. Pa. Jan. 5, 2010)

Summary

rejecting the plaintiff's argument the defendant county's disciplinary procedures and employee handbook created a property interest in continuing employment

Summary of this case from Brown v. Montgomery County

Opinion

Civil Action No. 08-213 Erie.

January 5, 2010


MEMORANDUM ORDER


This civil rights action was received by the Clerk of Court on July 25, 2008, and was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Susan Paradise Baxter for report and recommendation in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and Rules 72.1.3 and 72.1.4 of the Local Rules for Magistrates.

The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 19], filed on December 1, 2009, recommended that the motion to dismiss filed by Defendant Erie County [Doc. No. 16] be granted in part and denied in part. Specifically, the Magistrate Judge recommended that the motion should be granted as to the procedural due process claim and breach of contract claim, and denied as to the remainder of the § 1983 claims.

The parties were allowed ten (10) days from the date of service to file objections. Service was made on Plaintiff by certified mail and on Defendants. Plaintiff filed objections on December 10, 2009 [Doc. No. 21]. After de novo review of the motion and documents in the case, together with the Report and Recommendation and objections thereto, the following order is entered:

AND NOW, this 5th day of January, 2010;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion to dismiss filed by Defendant Erie County [Doc. No. 16] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part; the motion is GRANTED as to the procedural due process claim and breach of contract claim, and DENIED as to the remainder of the § 1983 claims.

The Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 19] of Magistrate Judge Baxter, filed on December 1, 2009, is adopted as the opinion of the Court.


Summaries of

Lord v. County

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Jan 5, 2010
Civil Action No. 08-213 Erie (W.D. Pa. Jan. 5, 2010)

rejecting the plaintiff's argument the defendant county's disciplinary procedures and employee handbook created a property interest in continuing employment

Summary of this case from Brown v. Montgomery County
Case details for

Lord v. County

Case Details

Full title:DAVID K. LORD, Plaintiff, v. ERIE COUNTY, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: Jan 5, 2010

Citations

Civil Action No. 08-213 Erie (W.D. Pa. Jan. 5, 2010)

Citing Cases

Shipp v. Donaher

This court may take judicial notice of appropriate items without converting defendants' motions into motions…

Brown v. Montgomery County

A company may indeed have a policy upon which they intend to act, given certain circumstances or events, but…