Opinion
1:17-cv-01452-NLH-AMD
09-14-2020
THE ESTATE OF RICHARD BARD and DANA GERMAN-BUNTON, as administrator ad-prosequendum of THE ESTATE OF RICHARD BARD, Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF VINELAND POLICE OFFICER CHRISTOPHER PUGLISI, Defendant.
APPEARANCES: SOLOMON MORDECHAI RADNER EXCOLO LAW PLLC 26700 LAHSER ROAD SUITE 401 SOUTHFIELD, MI 48033 CONRAD J. BENEDETTO LAW OFFICES OF CONRAD J. BENEDETTO 1233 HADDONFIELD-BERLIN ROAD SUITE 1 VOORHEES, NJ 08043 On behalf of Plaintiffs A. MICHAEL BARKER TODD J. GELFAND BARKER, GELFAND & JAMES LINWOOD GREENE 210 NEW ROAD SUITE 12 LINWOOD, NJ 08221 On behalf of Defendant
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
APPEARANCES: SOLOMON MORDECHAI RADNER
EXCOLO LAW PLLC
26700 LAHSER ROAD
SUITE 401
SOUTHFIELD, MI 48033 CONRAD J. BENEDETTO
LAW OFFICES OF CONRAD J. BENEDETTO
1233 HADDONFIELD-BERLIN ROAD
SUITE 1
VOORHEES, NJ 08043
On behalf of Plaintiffs A. MICHAEL BARKER
TODD J. GELFAND
BARKER, GELFAND & JAMES
LINWOOD GREENE
210 NEW ROAD
SUITE 12
LINWOOD, NJ 08221
On behalf of Defendant HILLMAN , District Judge
WHEREAS, this matter concerns claims by Plaintiff, Dana German-Bunton, the mother of Richard Bard, the decedent, arising out of the shooting death of Bard by Defendant City of Vineland police officer Christopher Puglisi; and
WHEREAS, Plaintiff's third amended complaint asserts a claim of excessive force against Puglisi in violation of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and New Jersey Civil Rights Act, N.J.S.A. 10:6-2(c) (Docket No. 51); and
For a detailed recitation of the procedural history of this case, see Docket No. 44. --------
WHEREAS, currently pending is Puglisi's motion for summary judgment (Docket No. 77); but
WHEREAS, on August 21, 2020, counsel for Plaintiff filed a motion to withdraw as Plaintiff's attorney in this matter (Docket No. 79); and
WHEREAS, in counsel's motion he relates, "Throughout litigation on this case, a significant breakdown of the attorney client relationship has arisen making withdrawal of the undersigned necessary." (Docket No. 79 at 2); and
WHEREAS, counsel's motion is set before the Magistrate Judge, and a telephonic hearing on the motion is scheduled for September 24, 2020 (Docket No. 80);
Therefore,
IT IS on this 14th day of September, 2020
ORDERED that Defendant's motion for summary judgment [77] be, and the same hereby is, DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; and it is further
ORDERED that Court will provide further direction regarding Defendant's summary judgment motion after the Magistrate Judge has resolved Plaintiff's counsel's motion to withdraw.
s/ Noel L. Hillman
NOEL L. HILLMAN, U.S.D.J. At Camden, New Jersey