Smith v. City of Chester
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
JOYNER, District Judge.
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59, plaintiffs have filed a motion for reconsideration of this Court’s previous decision entered January 5,1994, granting defendants’ Chester-Upland School District and Chester-Upland Board of School Directors motion to dismiss, 842 F.Supp. 147. Because plaintiffs have done nothing more than disagree with this Court and have failed to demonstrate a clear error of law, we must deny plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration.
Plaintiffs John I. Smith and Patricia N. Smith initiated this action seeking damages when…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Harsco Corp. v. Lucjan ZlotnickiCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1986
- Rottmund v. Continental Assurance Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1992
- Reich v. ComptonDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1993
- Smith v. City of ChesterDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1994
3Cited by27 opinions
- Tischio v. Bontex, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1998
- Douris v. SchweikerDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2002
- United States v. JasinDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2003
- Jarzyna v. Home Properties, L.P.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2016
- Drysdale v. WoerthDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2001
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.