From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Royster v. Sniezek

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
May 22, 2012
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:10-CV-2651 (M.D. Pa. May. 22, 2012)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:10-CV-2651

05-22-2012

TIFFANY L. ROYSTER Plaintiff v. T.R. SNIEZEK, et al. Defendants


(Chief Judge Kane)

(Magistrate Judge Smyser)


ORDER

Before the court in the captioned action is a March 26, 2012 report and recommendation of the magistrate judge. No timely objections have been filed.

Accordingly, this 22nd day of May, 2012, upon review of the record and the applicable law, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1) The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Smyser.

2) The motion to dismiss and motion for summary judgment (Doc. Nos. 9, 10) are GRANTED.

3) The claims against defendants Sniezek, Hendershot, Falzini, Hubble, and Zabala are dismissed pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(m). The FTCA claim and the ADA claim are dismissed. Defendant Steffan is granted summary judgment.

4) The case is remanded to Magistrate Judge Smyser for further proceedings.

_______________

Yvette Kane, Chief Judge

United States District Court

Middle District of Pennsylvania


Summaries of

Royster v. Sniezek

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
May 22, 2012
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:10-CV-2651 (M.D. Pa. May. 22, 2012)
Case details for

Royster v. Sniezek

Case Details

Full title:TIFFANY L. ROYSTER Plaintiff v. T.R. SNIEZEK, et al. Defendants

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

Date published: May 22, 2012

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:10-CV-2651 (M.D. Pa. May. 22, 2012)