Finnemen v. Septa
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
EDUARDO C. ROBRENO, J.
This civil rights action arises out of Plaintiff Nasir Finnemen’s1 arrest at a Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (“SEPTA”) station, and subsequent prosecution. The named defendants — who are employed by SEPTA or the City of Philadelphia — have moved for summary judgment. For the reasons that follow, the Court will grant in part and deny in part the motions for summary judgment.
1. FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY2
On April 4, 2013, Plaintiff Nasir Finne-men entered the SEPTA station at Kens-ington and Allegheny Avenue. Finnemen Dep.…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Graham v. ConnorSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Albright v. OliverSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Baker v. McCollanSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Groman v. Township Of ManalapanCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1995
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Thomas v. City of Phila.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2018
- Finneman v. SeptaDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2018
- Brown v. PeruginoDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2023
- Cayenne v. Tobyhanna Township, PADistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2024
- DOBROSKY v. LOMETTIDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2023
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.