Legal Opinion
Dyson v. Kocik
District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
Decided March 30, 1983No. Civ. A. 79-0365PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
RAMBO, District Judge.
This court has before it cross-motions for summary judgment, a motion by the defendants for oral argument on the motions for summary judgment, and a motion by the defendants to strike the plaintiff’s jury demand. The parties have thoroughly briefed the relevant issues on the summary judgment motions. Oral argument is not necessary.
There is no reason to restate the entire factual and procedural history of this litigation. The complete factual and procedural picture is presented in the comprehensive statement of undisputed facts which was filed with the…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Wolff v. McDonnellSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Rizzo v. GoodeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Hewitt v. HelmsSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Blonder-Tongue Laboratories, Inc. v. University of Illinois FoundationSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Farmer v. CarlsonDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1988
- Rodriguez v. City of PassaicDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1990
- Hewitt, Appeal OfCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1984
- Gavin Coco v. Helen Zane, individuallyDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 2026
- MCCOWAN v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIADistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2022