HREZIK v. MOYER et al, No. 5:2010cv04251 - Document 43 (E.D. Pa. 2012)
Court Description: OPINION ORDER THAT DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON COUNT I OF PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AGAINST DEFENDANT KEN A. MOYER IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON PLAINTIFF'S CLAIM IN COUNT I OF THE COMPLAINT BROUGHT PURSUANT TO 42 U.S.C. § 1983 FOR VIOLATION OF THE EIGHTH AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS IS GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT ALL CLAIMS IN COUNT I OF PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT BROUGHT PURSUANT TO 42 U.S.C. § 1983 FOR VIOLATION OF THE EIGHTH AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS ARE DISMISSED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT IN ALL O THER RESPECTS DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT CONCERNING COUNT I OF PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT IS DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT DEFENDANTS' MOTION FORSUMMARY JUDGMENT CONCERNING COUNT II OF PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT IS GRANTED . IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT COUNT II IS DISMISSED FROMPLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT ALL CLAIMS AGAINSTDEFENDANTS WILLIAM HEIM AND THE CITY OF READING ARE DISMISSED FROM THIS ACTION.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT COUNT III OF PLAI NTIFF'SCOMPLAINT SHALL BE CONSIDERED AS PART OF PLAINTIFF'S PRAYER FOR RELIEF REGARDING THE SURVIVING PORTION OF COUNT I OF PLAINTIFF'SCOMPLAINT. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JAMES KNOLL GARDNER ON 1/18/12. 1/19/12 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(er, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA JOHN HREZIK, ) ) Plaintiff ) ) vs. ) ) KEN A MOYER, In his Official ) Capacity1, ) ) WILLIAM HEIM, Chief of Police ) of the Reading Police ) Department,Individually, and ) in His Official Capacity and ) ) THE CITY OF READING, a City of ) the Third Class, and a ) Municipality of the Commonwealth ) of Pennsylvania, ) ) Defendants ) Civil Action No. 2010-cv-04251 O R D E R NOW, this 18th day of January, 2012, upon consideration of Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment, which motion was filed September 20, 2011 (Document 20); upon consideration of Plaintiff John Hrezik s Response in Opposition to Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment, which response was filed November 1, 2011 (Document 28); upon consideration of the briefs of the parties; and for the reasons expressed in the accompanying Opinion, IT IS ORDERED that Defendant s Motion for Summary Judgment is granted in part and denied in part. 1 The caption of plaintiff s Complaint originally indicated that he was suing Ken A. Moyer, Individually, and in his Official Capacity . By oral agreement of counsel placed on the record on January 17, 2012, the caption was amended to designate defendant as Ken A. Moyer, In his Official Capacity . IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment on Count I of plaintiff s Complaint against defendant Ken A. Moyer is granted in part and denied in part. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment on plaintiff s claim in Count I of the Complaint brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments is granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all claims in Count I of plaintiff s Complaint brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments are dismissed. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that in all other respects Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment concerning Count I of plaintiff s Complaint is denied. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment concerning Count II of plaintiff s Complaint is granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Count II is dismissed from plaintiff s Complaint. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all claims against defendants William Heim and the City of Reading are dismissed from this action. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Count III of plaintiff s Complaint shall be considered as part of plaintiff s prayer for -ii- relief regarding the surviving portion of Count I of plaintiff s Complaint. BY THE COURT: /s/ JAMES KNOLL GARDNER James Knoll Gardner United States District Judge -iii-
]]>
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.
