Kathleen Roberts; M.w., Aminor, by His Mother and Natural Guardian, Kathleen Roberts v. Township of Upper Darby

NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
______________
No: 12-4604
______________
KATHLEEN ROBERTS; M.W.,
A MINOR, BY HIS MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN,
KATHLEEN ROBERTS,
Appellants
v.
TOWNSHIP OF UPPER DARBY; SUPERINTENDENT MICHAEL CHITWOOD;
CAPTAIN GEORGE RHOADES; CAPTAIN ANTHONY PAPARO; ARTHUR
EARLE; OFFICER WILLIAM MCGOLDRICK; OFFICER PHILIP LYDON; OFFICER
WILLIAM SMINKEY
_______________
Appeal from the United States District Court
For the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
(Civ. No. 2-10-cv-00190)
District Judge: Honorable Legrome D. Davis
______________
Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)
October 31, 2013
Before: McKEE, Chief Judge, FISHER and SLOVITER, Circuit Judges
(Opinion Filed: January 10, 2014)
______________
OPINION
______________
McKEE, Chief Judge.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
Kathleen Roberts appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the
Township of Upper Darby and members of its police force. We will affirm the grant of
summary judgment substantially for the reasons set forth by the district court.
Since we write primarily for the parties who are familiar with this litigation, we
need not recite the underlying procedural and factual background of this case.
The district court concluded that Plaintiffs had failed to establish a genuine dispute
as to any material fact on any of the claims in the complaint. Roberts v. Twp. of Upper
Darby, No. 2:10-cv-190, 2012 WL 5928993 (E.D. Pa. Nov. 26, 2012). This appeal
followed.
In its Memorandum Opinion, the district court carefully and thoroughly explained
its reasoning as well as the basis for concluding that there was no genuine dispute as to
any material fact pertaining to any of the federal or state claims set forth in the complaint.
In doing so, the court undertook a well reasoned analysis that adequately and accurately
disposed of each claim that Roberts raised.
Since little can be added to the district court’s analysis, we will affirm the district
court’s grant of summary judgment as to all claims substantially for the reasons set forth
in the district court’s Memorandum Opinion.

-- 2 of 2 --