From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ferrigno v. Franklin Group, Inc.

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Mar 23, 2010
Civil Action No. 08-1140 (W.D. Pa. Mar. 23, 2010)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 08-1140.

March 23, 2010


ORDER


AND NOW, this 23rd day of March, 2010, after the plaintiff, Gary R. Ferrigno, filed an action in the above-captioned case, and after a Motion for Summary Judgment was filed by defendant, Franklin Group, Inc., and after a Report and Recommendation was filed by the United States Magistrate Judge granting the parties until March 18, 2010, to file written objections thereto, and upon consideration of the objections filed by plaintiff, and upon independent review of the record, and upon consideration of the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, which is adopted as the opinion of this Court,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 25) is DENIED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Rule 4(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, if defendant desires to appeal from this Order it must do so within thirty (30) days by filing a notice of appeal as provided in Rule 3, Fed.R.App.P.


Summaries of

Ferrigno v. Franklin Group, Inc.

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Mar 23, 2010
Civil Action No. 08-1140 (W.D. Pa. Mar. 23, 2010)
Case details for

Ferrigno v. Franklin Group, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:GARY R. FERRIGNO, Plaintiff, v. FRANKLIN GROUP, INC., t/d/b/a TSO OF OHIO…

Court:United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: Mar 23, 2010

Citations

Civil Action No. 08-1140 (W.D. Pa. Mar. 23, 2010)

Citing Cases

Meyer v. Callery Conway Mars HV, Inc.

See Doe v. C.A.R.S. Prot. Plus, Inc., 527 F.3d 358, 366 (3d Cir. 2008) . One way that this can be shown is…