From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Griffin v. Wingard

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Apr 25, 2014
Civil Action No. 13-792 (W.D. Pa. Apr. 25, 2014)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 13-792

04-25-2014

JAMAAL R. GRIFFIN, Plaintiff, v. JEFFERY A. WINGARD, Badge #16253; STEVE PIACENTI; CITY OF PITTSBURGH; TARA SMITH, Magistrate Judge, Jurisdiction Lincoln Avenue, Defendants.


Judge Cathy Bissoon

Magistrate Judge Maureen P. Kelly


MEMORANDUM ORDER

On June 10, 2013, this case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Maureen P. Kelly for pretrial proceedings in accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(l)(A) and (B), and Rules 72.C, 72.D and 72.G of the Local Rules for Magistrates. On March 25, 2014, the magistrate judge issued a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 45) recommending that Defendant Jeffery A. Wingard's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 23) and Defendant City of Pittsburgh's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 39) be granted and all of Plaintiff's claims be dismissed. Service of the Report and Recommendation was made on the parties, and no objections have been filed.

After a de novo review of the pleadings and documents in the case, together with the motions to dismiss, Plaintiff's response to Defendant Wingard's Motion to Dismiss, and the Report and Recommendation, the following Order is entered:

The Court notes that Plaintiff failed to submit a response to Defendant City of Pittsburgh's Motion to Dismiss.

AND NOW, this 25th day of April, 2014,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the March 25, 2014 Report and Recommendation (Doc. 45) is adopted as the opinion of the Court, with one noted exception.

Defendant Wingard's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 23) is GRANTED with prejudice, however, the Court finds that the grant of leave to amend is not warranted in this case, as amendment would be futile. In addition, Defendant City of Pittsburgh's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 39) is GRANTED with prejudice. Simply put, Plaintiff alleges no plausible claim that, subject to amendment, could be made viable.

Furthermore, because absolute immunity applies to the claims asserted against Magisterial District Judge Tara Smith, and because Plaintiff fails to allege any claims against any remaining party within the jurisdiction of this Court, all remaining claims are DISMISSED with prejudice.

__________

Cathy Bissoon

United States District Judge
cc: All counsel of record by Notice of Electronic Filing Jamaal R. Griffin
39244
950 Second Avenue
Pittsburgh, PA 15219


Summaries of

Griffin v. Wingard

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Apr 25, 2014
Civil Action No. 13-792 (W.D. Pa. Apr. 25, 2014)
Case details for

Griffin v. Wingard

Case Details

Full title:JAMAAL R. GRIFFIN, Plaintiff, v. JEFFERY A. WINGARD, Badge #16253; STEVE…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Date published: Apr 25, 2014

Citations

Civil Action No. 13-792 (W.D. Pa. Apr. 25, 2014)