From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Robertshaw v. Pudles

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Mar 20, 2013
CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-7353 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 20, 2013)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-7353

03-20-2013

BARBARA ROBERTSHAW v. GARY PUDLES, et al.


ORDER

AND NOW this 20th day of March, 2013, it is ORDERED that Pudles's motion to dismiss the amended complaint (Dkt. No. 95) is DENIED.

It is further ORDERED that Answernet's motion to dismiss the amended complaint (Dkt. No. 94) is DENIED.

It is further ORDERED that Babjak's motion to dismiss the amended complaint (Dkt. No. 104) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows: Robertshaw's negligence claim against Babjak is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; Bajak's motion is DENIED as to the fraud and breach of fiduciary duty claims against her.

On or before March 27, 2013 counsel and Mr. Pudles should notify the Court by letter the estimated length of the trial of this case and their trial attachments, if any, for the next three months. The Court will attempt to set a trial date for this matter as soon as practicable.

If the parties believe a settlement conference would be productive they should contact my deputy Mr. Charles Ervin (267-299-7559) promptly.

_________________________

THOMAS N. O'NEILL, JR., J.


Summaries of

Robertshaw v. Pudles

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Mar 20, 2013
CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-7353 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 20, 2013)
Case details for

Robertshaw v. Pudles

Case Details

Full title:BARBARA ROBERTSHAW v. GARY PUDLES, et al.

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

Date published: Mar 20, 2013

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-7353 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 20, 2013)

Citing Cases

Robertshaw v. Pudles

In my March 20, 2012 opinion regarding three motions to dismiss brought individually by the defendants I…