From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hartman v. Pennsylvania

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Sep 1, 2016
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:15-CV-523 (M.D. Pa. Sep. 1, 2016)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:15-CV-523

09-01-2016

C. BRYAN HARTMAN and MICHELE RENEE HARTMAN, Plaintiffs v. STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA, PENNSYLVANIA STATE POLICE, TROOPER JEREMIAH R. MISTICK, and TROOPER SHAWN PANCHIK, Defendants


( ) ORDER & JUDGMENT

AND NOW, this 1st day of September, 2016, upon consideration of defendants' motion (Doc. 18) for summary judgment, and for the reasons set forth in the accompanying memorandum, it is hereby ORDERED that:

1. Defendants' motion (Doc. 18) is GRANTED.

2. Judgment is ENTERED in favor of defendants and against plaintiffs on all counts of the complaint.

3. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.

/S/ CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER

Christopher C. Conner, Chief Judge

United States District Court

Middle District of Pennsylvania


Summaries of

Hartman v. Pennsylvania

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Sep 1, 2016
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:15-CV-523 (M.D. Pa. Sep. 1, 2016)
Case details for

Hartman v. Pennsylvania

Case Details

Full title:C. BRYAN HARTMAN and MICHELE RENEE HARTMAN, Plaintiffs v. STATE OF…

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

Date published: Sep 1, 2016

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:15-CV-523 (M.D. Pa. Sep. 1, 2016)