O'Hanlon v. City of Chester

Third Circuit

O'Hanlon v. City of Chester

79 F. App'x 531

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedOctober 31, 2003

DocketNos. 02-2155, 02-2161, 02-2162

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 79 F. App'x 531 (O'Hanlon v. City of Chester) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

O'Hanlon v. City of Chester, 79 F. App'x 531 (3d Cir. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

McKEE, Circuit Judge.

The owners of a rental property in the City of Chester, Pennsylvania brought this civil rights action against the defendants claiming that the defendants had violated the owners’ civil rights in attempting to enforce various health, fire and safety ordinances. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants and dismissed the suit. This appeal followed. Our review of the district court’s grant of summary judgment is plenary. [532]*532Huang v. BP Amoco Corp., 271 F.3d 560, 564 (3d Cir.2001).

Inasmuch as the district court (Hutton, J.) has already set forth the factual and procedural history of this case, it is not necessary to repeat that history here. See O’Hanlon et al. v. City of Chester et al, No. 00-664, 2002 WL 501138 (E.D.Pa. Mar. 27, 2002). The district court carefully and completely explained its reasons for granting summary judgment to the defendants in its thoughtful Memorandum Opinion and Order. We will affirm the district court substantially for the reasons set forth in that Memorandum Opinion.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

OPINION

McKEE, Circuit Judge.

The owners of a rental property in the City of Chester, Pennsylvania brought this civil rights action against the defendants claiming that the defendants had violated the owners’ civil rights in attempting to enforce various health, fire and safety ordinances. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants and dismissed the suit. This appeal followed. Our review of the district court’s grant of summary judgment is plenary. [532]*532Huang v. BP Amoco Corp., 271 F.3d 560, 564 (3d Cir.2001).

Inasmuch as the district court (Hutton, J.) has already set forth the factual and procedural history of this case, it is not necessary to repeat that history here. See O’Hanlon et al. v. City of Chester et al, No. 00-664, 2002 WL 501138 (E.D.Pa. Mar. 27, 2002). The district court carefully and completely explained its reasons for granting summary judgment to the defendants in its thoughtful Memorandum Opinion and Order. We will affirm the district court substantially for the reasons set forth in that Memorandum Opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

79 F. App'x 531, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ohanlon-v-city-of-chester-ca3-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack