§Why CasetextPricing

Murphy v. Mclane Eastern, Inc. et al

REPLY BRIEF re MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Count IV of the Complaint Defendant's Reply in Support of Its Motion to Dismiss Count IV of the Complaint with LR 7.1 Cert of Non-Concurrence and Certificate of Service

11 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 251,360 times   279 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a claim is plausible where a plaintiff's allegations enable the court to draw a "reasonable inference" the defendant is liable

  2. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 265,336 times   364 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a complaint's allegations should "contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face' "

  3. Robinson v. City of Pittsburgh

    120 F.3d 1286 (3d Cir. 1997)   Cited 1,385 times
    Holding that unsubstantiated oral reprimands and unnecessary derogatory comments were not adverse employment actions in a retaliatory conduct case

  4. Williams v. Philadelphia Housing Authority

    380 F.3d 751 (3d Cir. 2004)   Cited 943 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that on its own, an intervening temporal period of two months cannot raise an inference of causation

  5. Lichtenstein v. Univ. of Pittsburgh Med. Ctr.

    691 F.3d 294 (3d Cir. 2012)   Cited 707 times
    Holding that whether the case could proceed under a mixed-motive instruction was not relevant because the case could proceed under "the more taxing McDonnell Douglas standard"

  6. Com. of Pa. ex Rel. Zimmerman v. Pepsico, Inc.

    836 F.2d 173 (3d Cir. 1988)   Cited 1,369 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that legal theories set forth in a response brief cannot serve to amend a complaint in response to a motion to dismiss

  7. Kachmar v. Sungard Data Systems, Inc.

    109 F.3d 173 (3d Cir. 1997)   Cited 913 times
    Holding that Congress did not intend to hold individual employees liable under Title VII, which is parallel to the ADEA in many ways

  8. Washington v. Client Network Servs., Inc.

    CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-01331 (E.D. Pa. Apr. 20, 2016)   Cited 1 times
    Finding dismissal was appropriate where a litigant's complaint included no specific factual allegations to support a plausible claim that defendants' action were motivated by plaintiff's race, color, ancestry, religion, or national origin

  9. Duncan v. Chester Cnty. Hosp.

    CIVIL ACTION NO. 14-1305 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 29, 2016)   Cited 1 times

    CIVIL ACTION NO. 14-1305 03-29-2016 PATRICK DUNCAN, Plaintiff, v. THE CHESTER COUNTY HOSPITAL, Defendant. STENGEL, J. MEMORANDUM Currently pending before the Court are the Motion for Partial or Full Summary Judgment by Plaintiff Patrick Duncan ("Plaintiff") and the Motion for Summary Judgment by Defendant Chester County Hospital ("Defendant"). For the following reasons, Plaintiff's Motion for Partial or Full Summary Judgment is denied, and Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment is granted. I. FACTUAL

  10. Duran v. Cnty. of Clinton

    CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:14-CV-2047 (M.D. Pa. Sep. 25, 2015)   Cited 1 times

    CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:14-CV-2047 09-25-2015 THOMAS V. DURAN, Plaintiff v. COUNTY OF CLINTON, JEFFREY SNYDER, ROBERT SMELTZ, and JOEL LONG, Defendants Chief Judge Conner ( ) MEMORANDUM Plaintiff Thomas V. Duran ("Duran") filed the above-captioned action alleging a retaliation claim under the Family and Medical Leave Act ("FMLA"), procedural due process claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and state law claims for wrongful termination, breach of contract, and tortious interference with contract. Presently before