Legal Opinion

Riddick v. Cuyler

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided September 22, 1981No. Civ. A. 81-0246PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BENCH MEMORANDUM AND ORDER 1

NEWCOMER, District Judge.

Having heard oral argument, considered the briefs and engaged in independent research, the Court concludes that defendants’ motions for involuntary dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) should be granted. The Court is prepared now to render its findings of fact and conclusions of law.

A. FINDINGS OF FACT

1. James Riddick, Jr. (hereinafter “plaintiff”) is an adult citizen of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, residing at 6628 North Broad Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

2. Defendant Julius T. Cuyler is Superintendent of the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Bishop v. WoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  3. Arnett v. KennedySupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  4. Louis J. Abbruzzese v. William P. Berzak and Postmaster General Elmer T. Classen and United States of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1979

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Abraham v. PekarskiDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1982
  2. Jefferson County Assistance Office, Department of Public Welfare v. WolfeCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  3. Cullura v. School District of Bristol TownshipCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  4. Braderman v. Pennsylvania Housing Finance AgencyDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1985
  5. Portnoy v. PennickDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1984

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API