Legal Opinion
Friedman, Eisenstein, Raemer & Schwartz v. Afterman
District Court, N.D. Illinois
Decided December 26, 1984No. 83 C 9609PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
BUA, District Judge.
Before the Court is defendants’ motion tó dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim and lack of subject matter jurisdiction. For the reasons stated herein, defendants’ motion is denied.
In considering a motion to dismiss, the Court must accept all well-pleaded material facts as true and must make all reasonable inferences in a light most favorable to the plaintiff. City of Milwaukee v. Saxbe, 546 F.2d 693, 704 (7th Cir.1976). The Court, however, is not required to accept legal conclusions that may be alleged or that may be drawn from the pleaded facts. Id.…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- United Mine Workers of America v. GibbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Rosado v. WymanSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Maternally Yours, Inc. v. Your Maternity Shop, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1956
- City of Milwaukee v. SaxbeCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1976
- Scott Buethe v. Britt Airlines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1984
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Sweet v. City of ChicagoDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1996