Voglino v. Shapiro

• Court: District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
• Decided: December 9, 2021
• Docket: 3:21-cv-00565
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

PAUL VOGLINO, :

Plaintiff : CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:21-565

v. : (JUDGE MANNION)

JOSHUA SHAPIRO; REBECCA A. : ELO; TROOPER JENNIFER A. KOSAKEVITCH; and RALPH : ZEZZA, Special Agent : Defendants

ORDER Pending before the Court is the motion of non-party Jeffrey Cutler’s (“Intervenor”) motion to intervene the above-captioned case pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 24. (Doc. 5). To date, no party has filed a brief in opposition to intervenor’s motion and the time within which to do so has expired. See Local Rule 7.6, M.D.Pa. Nonetheless, for the following reasons, the Court will deny the motion. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides for two types of intervention, intervention as of right and permissive intervention. In the absence of a federal statute which confers a right to intervene, and there is no such statute in this case, Fed.R.Civ.P. 24(a) authorizes a party to intervene as of right if the movant can establish: “(1) a timely application for

leave to intervene has been filed, (2) a sufficient interest in the underlying litigation, (3) a threat that the interest will be impaired or affected by the disposition of the underlying action, and (4) that the existing parties to the

action do not adequately represent the prospective intervenor’s interests.” See Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Treesdale, Inc., 419 F.3d 216, 220 (3d Cir. 2005) (citation omitted). The movant’s failure to establish any factor is fatal. Id. Alternatively, a court may grant permissive intervention where a

movant makes a timely motion and “(A) is given a conditional right to intervene by a federal statute; or (B) has a claim or defense that shares with the main action a common question of law or fact.” See Fed.R.Civ.P. 24(b).

Here, the intervenor’s instant motion is incomprehensible and has no bearing or relevance to the above-captioned action. Thus, the intervenor fails to satisfy the requirements for intervention pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 24. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion to intervene, (Doc. 5)

is DENIED.

s/ Malachy E. Mannion_ MALACHY E. MANNION United States District Judge

Date: December 8, 2021 - 2 - 21-0565-04

- 3 -