IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WILLIAM BYARD LANCASTER 524 Brinton Street Philadelphia, PA 19144,
Plaintiff v.
SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, OFFICER F. WHITAKER, Badge Number 269 individually and as a police officer for SEPTA, 1234 Market Philadelphia, PA 19107,
Defendants

:
:
: Civil Action No. 02JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
:
:
:
:

COMPLAINT Introduction

Plaintiff William Byard Lancaster was subjected to arrest, detention and malicious

prosecution in the absence of probable cause and, separately, by virtue of a decision by the

policy-makers of the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) to detain,

arrest, harass and prosecute musicians and others who are engaged in protected First Amendment

activity. Mr. Lancaster's arrest and prosecution were undertaken in retaliation for the exercise of

his First, Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights and were motivated, at least in part, by

complaints made and a lawsuit filed by Plaintiff for previous constitutional violations by SEPTA

and its employees.

Mr. Lancaster, a noted musician and educator, was not involved in criminal activity and there

was no probable cause to arrest and initiate a prosecution. Mr. Lancaster seeks compensation for

the violation of rights guaranteed by the First, Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United

1

States Constitution and 42 U.S.C. §1983. Jurisdiction
1. This action is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983. Jurisdiction is founded upon 28 U.S.C. §§1331 and 1343(1), (3), (4) and the aforementioned statutory provision. Plaintiff further invokes the supplemental jurisdiction of this Court under 28 U.S.C. §1367(a) to hear and adjudicate state law claims.
Parties 2. Plaintiff William Byard Lancaster is a resident of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, and at all times relevant to this action resided in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 3. Defendant Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) is a governmental agency that owns, operates, manages, directs and controls the SEPTA Police Department which employs Defendant Whitaker. 4. Defendant F. Whitaker is and was at all times relevant to this action a police officer with the SEPTA Police Department and acting under color of state law. He is being sued in his individual capacity. 5. At all relevant times, all Defendants were acting under color of state law. 6. At all relevant times, the actions taken by all Defendants deprived Plaintiff of his constitutional and statutory rights.
Factual Allegations 7. On or about February 6, 2001, Mr. Lancaster was at or near the pedestrian Concourse below Two Penn Center in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Mr. Lancaster, a professional musician and educator, was playing a musical instrument in a public area.
2

8. At that time and place, SEPTA Police Officers Warren Bannister and Nate Bentley approached Mr. Lancaster. Bannister and Bentley were in uniform as SEPTA police officers and asserted their authority to act under color of law.
9. Bannister and Bentley, without cause or justification, arrested and detained Mr. Lancaster and charged him with the offense of obstructing highways and other public passages under 18 Pa.C.S. §5507. Mr. Lancaster was further detained and thereafter released on a Criminal Citation.
10. On May 1, 2001 Plaintiff appeared for trial on the obstruction case before the Honorable Marsha Neifield of the Municipal Court of Philadelphia County. At the conclusion of the prosecution's case, Mr. Lancaster was found not guilty.
11. At no time did Mr. Lancaster commit any offense against the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the United States or the County of Philadelphia for which an arrest may be lawfully made and a criminal prosecution initiated. At no time did Mr. Lancaster commit any illegal acts, or engage in any conduct which in any way justified the actions of Bannister and Bentley.
12. On May 2, 2001, Plaintiff filed suit under §1983 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Byard Lancaster v. SEPTA, et al., CA No. 01-CV-2162). The Complaint alleged violations of Mr. Lancaster's rights under the First, Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution as well as supplemental state law claims. The suit was based on the unlawful arrest, detention and malicious prosecution of Plaintiff by SEPTA, Bannister and Bentley on February 6, 2001.
13. On February 13, 2002, by Order of the Honorable Berle Schiller, judgment was entered for
3

Plaintiff and against Defendants SEPTA, Bannister and Bentley. 14. On or about July 26, 2002, Mr. Lancaster was at or near the pedestrian Concourse below
15th Street and John F. Kennedy Boulevard in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Mr. Lancaster was playing a musical instrument in a public area.
15. At that time and place, SEPTA Police Officer F. Whitaker approached Mr. Lancaster. Defendant Whitaker was in uniform as a SEPTA police officer and asserted his authority to act under color of law.
16. Defendant Whitaker, without cause or justification, arrested and detained Mr. Lancaster. After a period of detention, Defendant Whitaker charged Mr. Lancaster with the offense of "noise producing more than 100 feet" in Criminal Citation No. 02-49-000545. When Plaintiff did not want to sign the Criminal Citation, stating that he did not want to agree to the false allegations contained therein, Defendant Whitaker told Plaintiff that if he did not sign the Criminal Citation he would be handcuffed and held for four or five days. Mr. Lancaster signed the document and was thereafter released on the Criminal Citation which commanded that Mr. Lancaster appear in the Municipal Court of Philadelphia to answer the criminal charges or risk the issuance of a bench warrant for his arrest.
17. On October 16, 2002 Plaintiff appeared for trial on the Criminal Citation before the Honorable Eric Lilian of the Municipal Court of Philadelphia County. Judge Lilian dismissed the charges with prejudice.
18. At no time did Mr. Lancaster commit any offense against the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the United States or the County of Philadelphia for which an arrest may be lawfully made and a criminal prosecution initiated. At no time did Mr. Lancaster commit any
4

illegal acts, or engage in any conduct which in any way justified the actions of Defendants. 19. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of all Defendants, Mr. Lancaster suffered
and continues to suffer pain and emotional distress, some or all of which may be permanent. 20. Defendant Whitaker knew that he was without authority to detain, arrest and prosecute
Mr. Lancaster as he had committed no criminal offense and was exercising his First Amendment right to freedom of expression.
21. Defendant Whitaker lacked the jurisdiction and authority to detain, arrest and initiate a prosecution of Plaintiff.
22. The arrest and prosecution of Mr. Lancaster was the result of a decision by a policymaker(s) of SEPTA to detain, arrest, harass and prosecute musicians and others who are engaged in protected First Amendment activity.
23. The arrest and prosecution of Mr. Lancaster was the result of a decision by Defendants to retaliate against Plaintiff for the exercise of his First, Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights and for complaints made and the above-mentioned lawsuit filed by Plaintiff for previous constitutional violations by SEPTA and its employees.
24. The actions of Defendant Whitaker were willful, wanton, malicious, intentional, outrageous, deliberate and/or so egregious as to shock the conscience.
25. Defendants engaged in this conduct for the purpose of removing from the public streets persons, including Mr. Lancaster, who are viewed as offensive to the public image of SEPTA and Philadelphia, thereby violating Mr. Lancaster's constitutional rights by subjecting him to an unlawful arrest, detention and malicious prosecution.
5

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS 26. The allegations contained in paragraphs 1-25 of this Complaint are incorporated herein. 27. As a direct and proximate result of all Defendants' conduct, committed under color of state law, all Defendants deprived William Byard Lancaster of his right to be free from an unlawful detention, arrest and malicious prosecution, to be secure in his person and property and to due process and equal protection of the law. As a result, Mr. Lancaster suffered and continues to suffer harm, in violation of his rights under the laws and Constitution of the United States, in particular the First, Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments thereof, and 42 U.S.C. §1983. 28. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of all Defendants, Mr. Lancaster sustained pain and emotional distress and his right to freedom of expression, all to his detriment and loss. 29. Defendant SEPTA has encouraged, tolerated, ratified and has been deliberately indifferent to a pattern, practice and custom of and to the need for more or different training, supervision, investigation or discipline in the areas of: a. The proper exercise of police powers, including improper arrests, detentions and malicious prosecutions of citizens; b. Police officers' use of their status as police officers to employ the use of retaliation and malicious prosecution, or to achieve ends not reasonably related to their police duties; c. The failure of police officers to follow established policies, procedures, directives and instructions regarding the arrest and prosecution of street musicians, panhandlers and others under such circumstances as presented herein;
6

d. The failure to properly train, supervise and discipline all officers regarding the use of pretexual arrests for offenses such as disorderly conduct, obstruction of the highway and noise violations to remove street musicians and those perceived to be panhandlers from public access areas in Philadelphia and to deter those individuals from returning to such areas to engage in protected First Amendment activity; e. The failure to properly train, supervise and discipline all officers regarding their jurisdiction and authority to detain, arrest and initiate prosecutions in matters where SEPTA police officers have no such jurisdiction or authority; and f. The abuse of arrest powers by officers who retaliate against citizens due to complaints made or lawsuits filed for previous constitutional violations by SEPTA and its employees.
30. Defendant SEPTA has failed to properly sanction or discipline officers, who are aware of and subsequently conceal and/or aid and abet violations of constitutional rights of citizens by other SEPTA police officers, thereby causing and encouraging police, including the defendant officer in this case, to violate the rights of citizens such as Mr. Lancaster.
31. By these actions, Defendants have deprived Mr. Lancaster of rights secured by the First, Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution in violation of 42 U.S.C. §1983.
7

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION STATE LAW CLAIMS
32. The allegations contained in paragraphs 1-31 of this Complaint, are incorporated herein.
33. The acts and conduct of all Defendants alleged in the above stated cause of action
constitute assault and battery, false arrest and imprisonment, malicious prosecution, invasion of
privacy -- casting in a false light, negligence, gross negligence, and negligent hiring, training,
retention and supervision under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and this Court
has supplemental jurisdiction to hear and adjudicate those claims.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests the following relief:
a. Compensatory damages;
b. Punitive damages;
c. Reasonable attorney's fees and costs; and
d. Such other and further relief as appears reasonable and just including, but not limited to,
the adoption by SEPTA of a policy which accommodates and encourages the activities of
musicians in the public areas and corridors on and adjoining SEPTA transportation facilities.
e. Plaintiff demands a jury trial as to each Defendant and as to each count.
Paul Messing Attorney ID No. 17749 Jonathan Feinberg Attorney ID No. 88227 KAIRYS, RUDOVSKY,
EPSTEIN & MESSING 924 Cherry Street, Suite 500 Philadelphia, Pa. 19107 (215) 925-4400 Counsel for Plaintiff
8

 
 Case: 2:02-cv-7968 As of: 06/27/2013 01:23 PM EDT 1 of 2
CLOSED,STANDARD
United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:02−cv−07968−RB

LANCASTER v. SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY et al Assigned to: HONORABLE RONALD L. BUCKWALTER Cause: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 10/21/2002 Date Terminated: 04/10/2003 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other Jurisdiction: Federal Question

WILLIAM BYARD LANCASTER

represented by JONATHAN H. FEINBERG KAIRYS RUDOVSKY MESSING &FEINBERG LLP THE CAST IRON BLDG STE 501 SOUTH 718 ARCH STREET PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 215−925−4400 Fax: 215−925−5365 Email: jfeinberg@krlawphila.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

PAUL M. MESSING KAIRYS RUDOVSKY MESSING &FEINBERG LLP THE CAST IRON BLDG STE 501 SOUTH 718 ARCH STREET PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 215−925−4400 Fax: 215−925−5365 Email: pmessing@krlawphila.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
Defendant F. WHITAKER OFFICER, BADGE NUMBER 269, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS A POLICE OFFICER FOR SEPTA

represented by ROBERT M. WALLER SEPTA LEGAL DIVISION 1234 MARKET ST., 5TH FL PHILADELPHIA, PA 19107−3780 215−580−7472 Fax: 215−580−7078 Email: rwaller@septa.org LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by ROBERT M. WALLER (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed

# Docket Text

Case: 2:02-cv-7968 As of: 06/27/2013 01:23 PM EDT 2 of 2

10/21/2002 10/21/2002 10/21/2002 10/25/2002 10/25/2002 11/14/2002 11/14/2002 12/03/2002
12/17/2002 01/09/2003 01/15/2003 04/10/2003
04/10/2003

1 COMPLAINT against SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, F. WHITAKER ( Filing fee $ 150 receipt number 805765.), filed by WILLIAM BYARD LANCASTER.(ss, ) (Entered: 10/21/2002)
Summons Issued, mailed 10/21/02 as to SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, F. WHITAKER. (ss, ) (Entered: 10/21/2002)
DEMAND for Trial by Jury by WILLIAM BYARD LANCASTER. (ss, ) (Entered: 10/21/2002)
2 SUMMONS Returned Executed by WILLIAM BYARD LANCASTER. SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY served on 10/22/2002. Answer due 11/12/2002. (gn, ) (Entered: 10/25/2002)
3 SUMMONS Returned Executed by WILLIAM BYARD LANCASTER. F. WHITAKER served on 10/22/2002. Answer due 11/12/2002. (gn, ) (Entered: 10/25/2002)
4 ANSWER and affirmative defenses by SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, F. WHITAKER, certificate of service.(fb) Additional attachment(s) added on 1/3/2003 (vw, ). (Entered: 11/15/2002)
Issue Joined (fb) (Entered: 11/15/2002)
5 STIPULATION AND ORDER THAT FACT DISCOVERY WILL BE COMPLETED BY 4/1/03. DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS, IF ANY, WILL BE FILED BY 6/1/03. THE MATTER WILL BE READY FOR TRIAL ON 7/1/03. ( SIGNED BY JUDGE RONALD L. BUCKWALTER.) 12/3/02 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND FAXED.(gn, ) Modified on 12/3/2002 (gn, ). (Entered: 12/03/2002)
6 ORDER THAT A SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE WILL BE HELD ON 1/15/03 AT 10:00AM IN ROOM 3030. ( SIGNED BY JUDGE M. FAITH ANGELL ON 12/17/02. ) 12/18/02 ENTERED AND COPIES FAXED BY CHAMBERS.(gn, ) (Entered: 12/18/2002)
7 Entry of Appearance by JONATHAN H. FEINBERG on behalf of WILLIAM BYARD LANCASTER with Certificate of Service (ar, ) (Entered: 01/09/2003)
8 ORDER THAT THE CLERK IS DIRECTED TO REMOVE THIS CASE FROM MY DOCKET. ( SIGNED BY JUDGE M. FAITH ANGELL ON 1/15/03.) 1/16/03 ENTERED AND COPIES FAXED BY CHAMBERS.(gn, ) (Entered: 01/16/2003)
9 ORDER THAT THE PARTIES' SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT IS APPROVED. THE COURT SHALL RETAIN JURISDICTION OVER THIS MATTER FOR THE PERIOD SET FORTH IN PARA. IV(D) OF THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. TH CLERK SHALL CLOSE THIS MATTER STATISTICALLY. ( SIGNED BY JUDGE RONALD L. BUCKWALTER ON 4/10/03. ) 4/11/03 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED.(gn, ) (Entered: 04/11/2003)
***Civil Case Terminated. (nt, ) (Entered: 04/14/2003)

 
 Case: 2:01-cv-02162-BMS As of: 08/02/2012 10:28 PM EDT 1 of 4
CLOSED,STANDARD
United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:01−cv−02162−BMS

LANCASTER v. SEPTA, et al Assigned to: HONORABLE BERLE M. SCHILLER Demand: $0 Cause: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 05/02/2001 Date Terminated: 02/15/2002 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other Jurisdiction: Federal Question

WILLIAM BYARD LANCASTER

represented by PAUL M. MESSING KAIRYS RUDOVSKY MESSING &FEINBERG LLP THE CAST IRON BLDG STE 501 SOUTH 718 ARCH STREET PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106 215−925−4400 Fax: 215−925−5365 Email: pmessing@krlawphila.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
Defendant OFFICER WARREN BANNISTER

represented by JEROME J. RICHTER BLANK ROME LLP ONE LOGAN SQ PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103 215−569−5500 Fax: 215−569−5546 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
JORDANA COOPER BLANK ROME COMISKY &McCAULEY LLP WOODLAND FALLS CORPORATE PARK 210 LAKE DRIVE EAST SUITE 200 CHERRY HILL, NJ 08002 856−779−3600 Fax: 215−569−5555 Email: cooper−j@blankrome.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by JEROME J. RICHTER (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
JORDANA COOPER (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Case: 2:01-cv-02162-BMS As of: 08/02/2012 10:28 PM EDT 2 of 4

Defendant SERGEANT NATE BENTLEY INDIVIDUALLY AND AS POLICE OFFICERS FOR SEPTA
Defendant LT. JAMES REYNOLDS

represented by JEROME J. RICHTER (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
JORDANA COOPER (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by JEROME J. RICHTER (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
JORDANA COOPER (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 05/02/2001 05/02/2001 05/02/2001 05/02/2001 05/08/2001
05/08/2001
05/08/2001
05/24/2001
06/18/2001
06/18/2001 06/18/2001
06/18/2001

# Docket Text
1 Complaint. filing fee $ 150 receipt # 760611 (tj) (Entered: 05/03/2001)
Summons(es) 3 issued. Mailed to counsel on 5/3/01. (tj) (Entered: 05/03/2001)
Demand for jury trial by PLAINTIFF WILLIAM BYARD LANCASTER. (tj) (Entered: 05/03/2001)
Standard Case Management Track. (tj) (Entered: 05/03/2001)
2 Affidavit of: MICHAEL H. DOYLE re: served summons and complaint upon Alfred Gavs on behalf of DEFENDANT SEPTA. Served by: Personal Service on 5/7/01. (mbh) (Entered: 05/08/2001)
3 Affidavit of: MICHAEL H. DOYLE re: served summons and complaint upon Alfred Gavs on behalf of DEFENDANT WARREN BANNISTER. Served by: Personal Service on 5/7/01. (mbh) (Entered: 05/08/2001)
4 Affidavit of: MICHAEL H. DOYLE re: served summons and complaint upon Alfred Gavs on behalf of DEFENDANT NATE BENTLEY. Served by: Personal Service on 5/7/01. (mbh) (Entered: 05/08/2001)
5 Stipulation extending time to answer the complaint. Answer due on 6/18/01 for NATE BENTLEY, for WARREN BANNISTER, for SEPTA, with Clerk's approval. (mbh) (Entered: 05/25/2001)
6 Partial Answer to Complaint by DEFENDANT SEPTA, DEFENDANT WARREN BANNISTER, DEFENDANT NATE BENTLEY (Attorney JORDANA COOPER) with Affirmative Defenses, Certificate of Service. (mbh) (Entered: 06/18/2001)
ISSUE JOINED. (mbh) (Entered: 06/18/2001)
7 PARTIAL MOTION by DEFENDANT SEPTA, DEFENDANT WARREN BANNISTER, DEFENDANT NATE BENTLEY TO DISMISS COMPLAINT , MEMORANDUM, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE. (mbh) (Entered: 06/18/2001)
8 Answer by PLAINTIFF WILLIAM BYARD LANCASTER to MOTION TO DISMISS SUPPLEMENTAL STATE LAW CLAIMS AND TO STRIKE PUNITIVE DAMAGES, Memorandum, Certificate of Service. (mbh) (Entered: 06/18/2001)

Case: 2:01-cv-02162-BMS As of: 08/02/2012 10:28 PM EDT 3 of 4

07/05/2001
07/05/2001
08/06/2001 08/15/2001 09/04/2001 09/06/2001 10/31/2001 11/06/2001 11/07/2001
11/15/2001

9 ORDER THAT THE MOTION TO DISMISS DEFENDANT CITY OF PHILADELPHIA AS TO THE SUPPLEMENTAL STATE LAW AND ALL PUNITIVE DAMAGES IS GRANTED; THE MOTION TO DISMISS DEFENDANTS BANNISTER AND BENTLEY IN THEIR OFFICIAL CAPACITIES AS TO THE SUPPLEMENTAL STATE CLAIMS IS GRANTED; THE MOTION TO DISMISS DEFENDANTS BANNISTER AND BENTLEY IN THEIR INDIVIDUAL CAPACITIES AS TO THE SUPPLEMENTAL STATE CLAIMS IS DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; THE MOTION TO STRIKE CLAIMS FOR PUNITIVE DAMAGES UNDER SEC. 1983 AND THE SUPPLEMENTAL STATE CLAIMS AS AGAINST DEFENDANTS BANNISTER AND BENTLEY IS DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE ( SIGNED BY JUDGE BERLE M. SCHILLER ) 07/05/01 ENTERED AND COPIES FAXED BY CHAMBERS. (mbh) (Entered: 07/05/2001)
10 ORDER THAT THE ORDER OF THIS COURT DATED 7/5/01 IS VACATED; THE MOTION TO DISMISS DEFENDANT SEPTA AS TO SUPPLEMENTAL STATE LAW CLAIMS AND ALL PUNITIVE DAMAGES IS GRANTED; THE MOTION TO DISMISS DEFENDANTS BANNISTER AND BENTLEY IN THE OFFICIAL CAPACITIES AS TO SUPPLEMENTAL STATE LAW CLAIMS IS GRANTED; THE MOTION TO DISMISS DEFENDANTS BANNISTER AND BENTLEY IN THE INDIVIDUAL CAPACITIES AS TO SUPPLEMENT STATE LAW CLAIMS IS DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; THE MOTION TO STRIKE CLAIMS FOR PUNITIVE DAMAGES AND SUPPLEMENT STATE LAW CLAIMS AGAINST BANNISTER AND BENTLY IS DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE ( SIGNED BY JUDGE BERLE M. SCHILLER ) 07/06/01 ENTERED AND COPIES FAXED BY CHAMBERS ON 07/05/01. (mbh) (Entered: 07/06/2001)
11 Answer to Count II of Complaint by DEFENDANT WARREN BANNISTER, DEFENDANT NATE BENTLEY, Certificate of Service. (mbh) (Entered: 08/06/2001)
12 MOTION by PLAINTIFF WILLIAM BYARD LANCASTER TO COMPEL DISCOVERY AGAINST DEFENDANTS , MEMORANDUM, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE. (mbh) Modified on 08/15/2001 (Entered: 08/15/2001)
13 CROSS MOTION by DEFENDANT SEPTA, DEFENDANT WARREN BANNISTER, DEFENDANT NATE BENTLEY FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER , MEMORANDUM, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE. (mbh) (Entered: 09/04/2001)
14 Response by PLAINTIFF WILLIAM BYARD LANCASTER to DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER, Memorandum, Certificate of Service. (mbh) (Entered: 09/06/2001)
15 Supplemental Memorandum by DEFENDANT SEPTA, DEFENDANT WARREN BANNISTER, DEFENDANT NATE BENTLEY in Further Support of Defendants' MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER BASED ON THE TESTIMONY OF PLAINTIFF AT HIS DEPOSITION, Certificate of Service. (mbh) (Entered: 11/01/2001)
16 ORDER THAT PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. DEFENDANTS' CROSS−MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER IS DENIED ( SIGNED BY JUDGE BERLE M. SCHILLER ) 11/7/01 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND FAXED BY 11/6/01. (mbh) (Entered: 11/07/2001)
17 PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER THAT ANY MOTIONS FOR LEAVE TO AMEND THE PLEADINGS OR JOIN OTHER PARTIES SHALL BE FILED BY 11/16/01; ALL DISCOVERY SHALL BE COMPLETED BY 4/26/02; ANY MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT SHALL BE FILED BY 4/26/02; A FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE WILL BE HELD ON 5/28/02 AT 8:30; JURY TRIAL IS SET FOR 6/3/02 ( SIGNED BY JUDGE BERLE M. SCHILLER 11/8/01 ENTERED AND COPIES FAXED BY CHAMBERS ON 11/7/01. (mbh) (Entered: 11/08/2001)
18 MOTION by PLAINTIFF WILLIAM BYARD LANCASTER FOR LEAVE TO AMEND THE COMPLAINT , MEMORANDUM, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE.

Case: 2:01-cv-02162-BMS As of: 08/02/2012 10:28 PM EDT 4 of 4

11/16/2001 11/21/2001 11/21/2001 12/06/2001 12/14/2001 12/21/2001 01/17/2002
02/13/2002 02/13/2002 02/14/2002
02/15/2002 02/15/2002
02/15/2002 03/11/2002

(mbh) (Entered: 11/16/2001)
19 ORDER THAT PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND THE COMPLAINT IS GRANTED ( SIGNED BY JUDGE BERLE M. SCHILLER ) 11/19/01 ENTERED AND COPIES FAXED BY CHAMBERS. (mbh) (Entered: 11/19/2001)
20 Amended Complaint by PLAINTIFF WILLIAM BYARD LANCASTER against JAMES REYNOLDS. (mbh) (Entered: 11/23/2001)
1 Summons issued. Forwarded to: counsel on 11/23/01. (mbh) (Entered: 11/23/2001)
21 Affidavit of: PAUL MESSING re: served summons and complaint upon Jordana Cooper, Esquire on behalf of DEFENDANT JAMES REYNOLDS. Served by: Personal Service on 12/4/01. (mbh) (Entered: 12/06/2001)
22 ORDER THAT A SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE WILL BE CONDUCTED ON 1/23/02 AT 10:00 ( SIGNED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE JACOB P. HART ) 12/17/01 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND FAXED BY CHAMBERS ON 12/14/01. (mbh) (Entered: 12/17/2001)
23 Answer by SEPTA, WARREN BANNISTER, NATE BENTLEY, JAMES REYNOLDS to Amended Complaint with Affirmative Defenses, Certificate of Service. (mbh) (Entered: 12/24/2001)
24 FINAL PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER THAT A FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE WILL BE HELD ON 5/28/02 AT 8:30; FINAL PRETRIAL MOTIONS ARE DUE BY 5/21/02; A JURY TRIAL IS SET FOR 6/3/02 ( SIGNED BY JUDGE BERLE M. SCHILLER ) 1/18/02 ENTERED AND COPIES FAXED BY CHAMBERS ON 1/17/02. (mbh) (Entered: 01/18/2002)
25 Offer of Judgment of DEFENDANT SEPTA, DEFENDANT WARREN BANNISTER, DEFENDANT NATE BENTLEY, DEFENDANT JAMES REYNOLDS (mbh) (Entered: 02/14/2002)
26 Acceptance of Offer of Judgment of PLAINTIFF WILLIAM BYARD LANCASTER, Certificate of Service. (mbh) (Entered: 02/14/2002)
27 ORDER THAT JUDGMENT IS ENTERED FOR WILLIAM BYARD LANCASTER AGAINST SEPTA, WARREN BANNISTER, NATE BENTLEY, JAMES REYNOLDS for $12,000.00 TOGETHER WITH INTEREST AND COSTS. 2/14/02 ENTERED COPIES FAXED. ( SIGNED BY JUDGE BERLE M. SCHILLER ) (mbh) (Entered: 02/14/2002)
28 MOTION by DEFENDANT SEPTA, DEFENDANT WARREN BANNISTER, DEFENDANT NATE BENTLEY, DEFENDANT JAMES REYNOLDS TO AMEND JUDGMENT , MEMORANDUM, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE. (mbh) (Entered: 02/15/2002)
29 AMENDED ORDER THAT JUDGMENT IS ENTERED IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF AND AGAINST DEFENDANTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $12,000.00 INCLUDING COSTS NOW ACCRUED AND ATTORNEY'S FEES 2/19/02 ENTERED AND COPIES FAXED BY CHAMBERS ON 2/15/02. ( SIGNED BY JUDGE BERLE M. SCHILLER ) (mbh) (Entered: 02/19/2002)
Case closed (kv) (Entered: 02/22/2002)
30 Satisfaction of Judgment by PLAINTIFF WILLIAM BYARD LANCASTER (mbh) (Entered: 03/11/2002)