District Court

MEMORANDA AND ORDERS

AUGUST 01, 2024

BY SCHMEHL, J.

USA v. Dougherty et al; 19-064; The foregoing, Counsel for Defendants and the Union shall meet and confer as to the classification of fees according to the Court�s instructions.

BY SCOTT, J.

USA v. Weiss; 20-163; The foregoing reasons, the Court will deny Defendant�s Motion (ECF No. 135).

BY MARSTON, J.

Brooks v. Trans Union LLC; 22-048; The reasons discussed above, Plaintiff�s motion to strike is granted in part and denied in part. The Court strikes Wodzinski�s expert report and testimony as inadmissible under the standard outlined in Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and Daubert.

BY KEARNEY, J.

Burgo v. Boulevard Autogroup, LLC; 23-3187; Mr. Burgo prevailed on his age discrimination claim relating to a hostile work environment at Boulevard Autogroup from 2018 until his departure on June 22, 2020. He adduced ample evidence of repeated age-based comments.

BY BEETLESTONE, J.

Hamliton v. Norristown State Hospital; 23-4068; Norristown has failed to establish that there is no genuine dispute of material fact exists regarding the severity and pervasiveness of the alleged harassment, or regarding its liability for the actions of its employees vis-�-vis Hamilton, summary judgment will be denied as to Hamilton�s hostile-work-environment claim.

BY BAYLSON, J.

St. Louis v. New Hudson Facades LLC; 23-4516; The foregoing reasons, Defendant�s Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED.

Frempong et al v. The Sheriff of Philadelphia et al; 24-1064; The foregoing reasons, the Sheriff of Philadelphia�s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED without prejudice and with an opportunity for Plaintiff to amend.

BY QUI�ONES ALEJANDRO, J.

Boddie v. Hennys Sports Bar et al; 24-1393; Plaintiff has plead facts sufficient to plausibly show that the City failed to provide adequate de-escalation training to its CCIP advocates despite the high frequency with which they would be expected to confront violent altercations as �violence interrupters� and that the alleged training deficiencies caused Plaintiff�s injury. As such, Plaintiff has satisfied the pleading requirements for a Monell claim.

BY SURRICK, J.

Frazier v. Experian Information Solutions; 24-2242; The foregoing reasons, the Court will dismiss Frazier�s Amended Complaint with prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. � 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for failure to state a claim. Frazier had two opportunities to allege plausible claims. The Court concludes that a further opportunity to amend would be futile.

AUGUST 02, 2024

BY LEESON, JR, J.

Kushner v. Link et al; 16-045; The Court overrules the objections to the R&R and adopts the R&R�s findings and recommendations in its entirety. Kushner�s petition for habeas relief is denied and dismissed. The Court further declines to issue a COA or hold an evidentiary hearing.

BY BAYLSON, J.

New Age Development Group, LLC v. JRW Service Group LLC; 23-3676; The factors together, this Court will set aside the default for New Age. JRW must file an answer or other responsive pleadings to New Age�s Complaint within fourteen days.

BY BEETLESTONE, J.

Doe v. City of Philadelphia et al; 24-468; The foregoing reasons, IBX�s Motion to Dismiss will be granted in part and denied in part.

Leon v. Hanoch et al; 24-1060; The foregoing reasons, Goodman�s Motion to Dismiss will be granted, and Hanoch�s Motion to Dismiss will be granted in part and denied in part.