Cheswick woman settles federal lawsuit claiming police violated her civil rights
A Cheswick woman has settled her federal lawsuit claiming that Plum police conspired with her ex-husband to violate her civil rights, according to an order issued by U.S. District Judge Joy Flowers Conti on Wednesday.
Mary Jo Ronco claimed in a lawsuit filed in May 2011 that Sgt. James Miller and officers Joseph Little and William Snyder used excessive force while arresting her on May 6, 2009, for violating what she claimed was a nonexistent order banning her from her former residence.
The borough's answer denied that Miller was present when police arrested Ronco and he was dismissed from the case in July. The borough's court filings also include an April 13, 2009, order giving Joseph Ronco exclusive possession of the residence.
Mary Jo Ronco settled her claims against her ex-husband in January, according to court documents. Conti's order doesn't provide any details on the agreement between Mary Jo Ronco, the borough and the other two officers.
Lawyers for all sides and the borough's solicitor couldn't immediately be reached for comment.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.