Legal Opinion
Carter v. City of Philadelphia
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided April 20, 1998No. 2:97-cv-04499PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Kauffman, District Judge.
The Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office has moved pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) to dismiss all Counts of the Amended Complaint brought against defendant Richard Roe (“Roe”). 1 Roe was named by plaintiff Raymond Carter (“Carter”) both in his official and individual capacities. For the reasons set forth below, this Court finds that the official capacity claims against Roe are barred because, when performing its investigatory and prosecutorial functions, the District Attorney’s Office is an arm of the State protected from suit in federal court by the…
2Cases cited49 opinions
- Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Will v. Michigan Department of State PoliceSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Knight v. VernonDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · 1998
- Carter v. City of PhiladelphiaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1999