Legal Opinion
Bartol v. Barrowclough
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided May 3, 2017No. CIVIL ACTION NO. 17-0614PublishedCited by 64 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
EDUARDO C. ROBRENO, District Judge
Plaintiff Patrick Bartol (“Plaintiff’) filed a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and various state laws, bringing thirteen different causes of action against multiple defendants, including three individual police officers, the police chief of Tinicum Township, the Tinicum Township Police Department and its individual members, the Tinicum Township Board of Commissioners and its individual members, and Tinicum Township itself (collectively, “Defendants”). Defendants filed a partial motion to dismiss and strike certain portions of the complaint, and…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Davis v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co. ConsolidatedCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2008
- Blanche Paylor v. Hartford Fire Insurance GroupCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2014
- Hynson v. City of Chester, Legal DepartmentCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1988
- Sikes v. Teleline, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2002
3Cited by64 opinions
- M.B. v. Schuylkill Cnty.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2019
- A.B. v. MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2020
- ABDUL-AHAD v. ESSEX COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENTDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2021
- ABIRA MEDICAL LABORATORIES, LLC v. CENTENE CORPORATIONDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2024
- Alson Alston v. CubeSmart, et al.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2026
59 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.