Gustave Diamond

“plaintiffs’ motion for sanctions for spoliation of evidence will be denied”

“to exclude spoliation evidence will be granted.”

“Presently before the court are motions to intervene by a number of municipalities in Allegheny County. For the reasons set forth below, the motions will be denied.”

“For the foregoing reasons, the IRS’s motion for reconsideration will be denied.”

“Accordingly, defendants’ motion to exclude Moy’s testimony will be denied.”

“For the following reasons, defendants’ motions will be denied.”

“Accordingly, the court will deny defendants’ motion without prejudice to defendants’ right to renew their objection to the use of this evidence at the time of trial.”

“Because plaintiff has not introduced significant portions of his actual evidence into the record at this juncture, the City’s motion for summary judgment will be denied without prejudice to its right to seek judgment as a matter of law on the same grounds at the close of plaintiffs case-in-chief.”

“The defendant, Charles Ray Edwards, has moved this court for the severance of Count Three of the indictment from Counts One and Two. For the reasons set forth below, the motion will be granted.”

“Presently before the court is the defendants’ motion to strike plaintiff’s jury demand. For the reasons set forth below, the motion will be denied.”

“Accordingly, defendants’ motion will be denied.”

“Accordingly, the government's motion to dismiss will be denied.”

“Accordingly, the motion of the government for summary judgment is granted.”

“AND NOW, this 8th day of October, 1991, for the reasons stated in the opinion filed this day, IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for award of attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act be, and the same hereby is, denied.”

“At the hearing on June 8, 2005, the court ruled on all of the defendant’s pretrial motions except his motion to suppress. Specifically, the court indicated it would: (1) grant in part and deny in part defendant’s motion for discovery (Document No. 17) and his motion requesting notice pursuant to Fed.R.Evid. 404, 405, 406, 407 & 408 (Document No. 19); (2) deny as moot defendant’s motion for notice by the prosecution of its intention to use evidence arguably subject to suppression (Document No. 20); and, (3) grant defendant’s motion for disclosure of impeachment evidence (Document No. 21).”

“At the supplemental hearing held on June 28, 2005, the court denied defendant’s motion for a view (Document No. 27).”

“In addition, at the June 8, 2005, hearing, the court granted defendant’s oral motion to amend his suppression motion also to seek exclusion of any statements defendant allegedly made after the stop.”

“Accordingly, defendant’s motion to suppress will be granted.”