Legal Opinion
Riffin v. Consol. Rail Corp.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided January 30, 2019No. CIVIL ACTION NO. 17-5685PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
NITZA I. QUIÑONES ALEJANDRO, District Judge.
INTRODUCTION
Before this Court is a motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim *572upon which relief can be granted filed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure ("Rule") 12(b)(6) by Defendant Consolidated Rail Corporation ("Defendant" or "Conrail"). [ECF 11]. In its motion, Defendant argues, inter alia , that Pennsylvania's champerty doctrine invalidates the assignment of claims on which Plaintiff James Riffin ("Plaintiff" or "Riffin") solely relies to support his standing to bring the underlying claims. Plaintiff has opposed the…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Phillips v. County of AlleghenyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2008
- Fowler v. UPMC SHADYSIDECourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2009
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- DO NOT FILE IN THIS CASE - TRANSFERRED TO CAMDEN NEW CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:19-cv-21607District Court, D. New Jersey · 2023
- DO NOT FILE IN THIS CASE - TRANSFERRED TO CAMDEN NEW CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:19-cv-21607District Court, D. New Jersey · 2021
- ADLER v. GRUMA CORPORATIONDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2023
- CHEMALLOY COMPANY, LLC v. CITIBANK, N.ADistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2022
- COULTER v. COULTERDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2023
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.