Pennsylvania Western District Court
Judge:David S Cercone
Case #: 2:13-cv-01280
Nature of Suit440 Civil Rights - Other Civil Rights
Cause42:1983 Civil Rights Act
Case Filed:Sep 03, 2013
Terminated:Aug 15, 2017
Last checked: Wednesday Dec 31, 2014 6:58 AM EST
Defendant
DANA L. FAYOCK
Represented By
Robert A. Willig
Office Of Attorney General
contact info
Defendant
JOHN A. KOPAS, III
Represented By
Jason R. McLean
Grogan Graffam, P.C.
contact info
Bethann R. Lloyd
Grogan Graffam
contact info
Defendant
GERALD SOLOMON
Represented By
Thomas P. Pellis
Meyer, Darragh, Buckler, Bebenek & Eck, P.L.L.C.
contact info
Defendant
RALPH WARMAN
Represented By
Thomas P. Pellis
Meyer, Darragh, Buckler, Bebenek & Eck, P.L.L.C.
contact info
Evaluator
ROBERT J. CINDRICH
Represented By
Robert J. Cindrich
Titus & Mcconomy
contact info
Plaintiff
DAVID MUNCHINSKI
Represented By
Noah Geary
Washington Trust Building
contact info

GPO Jun 27 2017
of his rights under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, the motion is GRANTED. In all other aspects, the motion is DENIED; (2) The Motion for Summary Judgment filed on behalf of Gerald Solomon (Docket No. 129) is granted in part and denied in part. Solomon's motion for summary judgment on Plaintiff's claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging malicious prosecution is GRANTED. In all other aspects, the motion is DENIED; (3) The Motion for Summary MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER as follows: (1) The Motion for Summary Judgment filed on behalf of Dana L. Fayock (Docket No. 125) is granted in part and denied in part. With regard to Plaintiff's claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging violationJudgment filed on behalf of Ralph Warman (Docket No. 132) is granted in part and denied in part. Warman's motion for summary judgment on Plaintiff's claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging malicious prosecution is GRANTED. In all other aspects, the motion is DENIED; and (4) The Motion for Summary Judgment filed on behalf of David Munchinski (Docket No. 136) is granted in part and denied in part. The motion is GRANTED to the extent the Court finds Plaintiff's rights under Brady v. Maryland were violated by Warman for the intentional revision of the Goodwin Report, and by both Warman and Solomon for their suppression of the following exculpatory evidence: (1) the Bates Report; (2) the Goodwin/Powell Report; (3) the Powell Addendum; (4) Alfords Autopsy Addendum; (5) the Mangiacarne/Carbone Report; (6) the Kinch Report; (7) Bowen's Parole Revocation Documents; (8) the Dunkard/Proud Report; (9) the Veil/Mangello Report; and (10) the Madden/Lucy Report. In all other aspects, the motion is DENIED.Signed by Judge David S. Cercone on 6/27/17. (jmc)


Create an account to get the full docket for this case.