TOWNSEND v. CITY OF CHESTER et al, No. 2:2019cv01023 - Document 19 (E.D. Pa. 2020)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION ORDER THAT OFFICER WALTMAN'S MOTION TO DISMISS IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART AS OUTLINED HEREIN. THE CITY OF CHESTER'S MOTION TO DISMISS IS GRANTED AS OUTLINED HEREIN. WITHIN 30 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS ORDER, PLAINTIFF MAY FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT, ETC. SIGNED BY HONORABLE MITCHELL S. GOLDBERG ON 7/29/20. 7/29/20 ENTERED AND COPIES NOT MAILED TO PRO SE; E-MAILED.(amas, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
TOWNSEND v. CITY OF CHESTER et al Doc. 19 Case 2:19-cv-01023-MSG Document 19 Filed 07/29/20 Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA DAVID TOWNSEND, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF CHESTER, et al., Defendants. : : : : : : : CIVIL ACTION NO. 19-1023 ORDER AND NOW, this 29th day of July, 2020, upon consideration of the Motion to Dismiss by Defendant Officer Bradley Waltman (Doc. No. 16) and the Motion to Dismiss by Defendant City of Chester (Doc. No. 17), and there being no response from Plaintiff David Townsend, it is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1. Officer Waltman’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: a. The Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s selective enforcement claim under § 1983 is DENIED; b. The Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s § 1983 claims for false arrest and false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, and violation of the First Amendment is GRANTED and these claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to Plaintiff’s right to file an amended complaint. c. The Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s state law claims for false arrest and false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, defamation and slander per se, and deceitful and fraudulent conduct is GRANTED and these claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to Plaintiff’s right to file an amended complaint. d. The Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s state law claims for negligent performance of duty and violation of the Pennsylvania Constitution is GRANTED and these claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:19-cv-01023-MSG Document 19 Filed 07/29/20 Page 2 of 2 2. The City of Chester’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED as follows: a. The Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s § 1983 claim is GRANTED and this claim is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to Plaintiff’s right to file an amended complaint. b. The Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s state law claims is GRANTED and these claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. c. The Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s request for punitive damages is GRANTED and this request is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE 3. Within thirty (30) days from the date of this Order, Plaintiff may file an amended complaint that corrects any deficiencies in the claims that were dismissed without prejudice and repleads any claims that were not dismissed. Failure to do so may result in dismissal of the case. BY THE COURT: /s/ Mitchell S. Goldberg MITCHELL S. GOLDBERG, J.
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
