HINTON v. PENNSYLVANIA STATE POLICE, No. 2:2008cv00685 - Document 52 (W.D. Pa. 2010)
Court Description: ORDER denying 51 Motion for Partial Reconsideration of the Opinion and Order of 8/30/2010. Signed by Chief Judge Gary L. Lancaster on 9/7/10. (map)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
HINTON v. PENNSYLVANIA STATE POLICE Doc. 52 $~~ ]~nuor lfERIBY ., I't IS OIm 'l'HAT THE rITHII 7i:jS~ J'GARY L. LANCASTER, mrl1'£D STATES DISTRIct JtlOOI UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR "rHE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA JOLANDO HINTON, CIVIL ACTION 08-685 Plaintiff, v. JUDGE GARY L. LANCASTER PENNSYLVANIA STATE POLICE, Defendant. MOTION FOR PARTIAL RECONSIDERATION OF THE OPINION AND ORDER OF AUGUST 30, 2010 (Doc. 50.) I. 1. The HOV Citation Incident In its Memorandum Opinion (Doc. 50) in support of its Order granting Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment in part, the Court states that Hinton relies solely on the findings of a grievance arbitrator to disprove PSP's articulated reason for "the HOV citation incident". (Doc 50, pp. 30, 31.) 2. In so stating, the Court fails to consider the signed statements of Donna Manker and Yoel Rabin. (Doc 30, Exs. P-3 and P-4.) 3. Lt. Sheldon Epstein initiated an internal investigation alleging Hinton had falsely stated that a citation issued to Rabin was withdrawn on Dec. 2, 2008 and had further falsely informed Rabin that the citation was withdrawn when it had not been. (Doc 25, 4. mr 45 - 48, Doc. 25 - 9, Ex. 18.) Rabin's statement indicates that Epstein personally informed him that he (Epstein) "received a written notification from Trooper Hinton that he plans to withdraw 1 Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
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.
