District Court
MEMORANDA AND ORDERS
JULY 31, 2024
BY SLOMSKY, J.
USA v. Lloyd; 21-081; Defendant�s Motions to Vacate, Set
Aside, or Correct a Sentence Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. � 2255 (Doc. Nos. 66, 71)
will be denied. The Court will not hold an evidentiary hearing and will not
issue a certificate of appealability.
USA v. Furxhiu; 24-224; The
foregoing reasons, upon the Court�s de novo review of the Magistrate Judge�s
Detention Order, the Court will grant Defendant�s request for Pretrial Release
(Doc. No. 14). An appropriate Order with the following conditions of bail will
be issued.
BY KENNEY, J.
Talbert v. Harry et al; 22-2011; The
foregoing reasons, petitioner�s motion is DENIED. Petitioner may proceed by
filing a new habeas petition.
BY KEARNEY, J.
Burgo v. Boulevard Autogroup, LLC; 23-3187; We deny
Boulevard Autogroup�s Motion for judgment as a matter
of law or motion for new trial. We deny its request for remittitur.
BY MURPHY, J.
Miller et al v. Chester County Commissioners, County of
Chester et al; 23-4192; The foregoing reasons, we will dismiss with prejudice
Mr. Miller�s claims against CCP and his official capacity claims against the
individual Defendants. Mr. Miller�s Fourteenth Amendment deliberate
indifference claims, his claims asserted pursuant to Monell,
and his claims asserted under the ADA and the RA will be served for a
responsive pleading.
BY REID, J.
Michael S. v. O�Malley; 23-4274; In accordance with the
above discussion, I conclude that the Plaintiff�s Request for Review should be
denied, and judgment entered in favor of the Commissioner.
BY SAVAGE, J.
Diaz v. Empire Fire and Marine Insurance Company et al;
24-1549; There is diversity of citizenship and the amount in controversy
exceeds $75,000.00, we have subject matter jurisdiction. Therefore, the motion
to remand shall be denied.
BY PAPPERT, J.
Alvarez v. City of Phila et al;
24-3127; The foregoing reasons, the Court grants
Alvarez leave to proceed in forma pauperis and
dismiss his Complaint.
BY GALLAGHER, J.
Westport Insurance Corporation v. McGogney
et al; 22-2431; The Court finds that Westport has sufficiently established that
it is entitled to declaratory relief against McGogney
and that the Chamberlain factors support an entry of default judgment given the
continued prejudice to Westport from McGogney�s
failure to respond in any way to the Complaint or to this Motion. Accordingly,
the motion for default judgment is granted.