Legal Opinion
Muhammad v. United States
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided August 7, 2012No. Civil Action No. 11-5785PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
McLAUGHLIN, District Judge.
This action arises from a warrantless entry and search of the plaintiffs’ home. Pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b), 2671-2680, Abdul Rahim Muhammad, Sharon Muhammad, Kharee Muhammad, and Tanasia Edmunds, brought Pennsylvania tort law claims against the United States. The government has moved to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim.1 The plaintiffs have agreed to the dismissal of their detention and reckless conduct claims. The remaining FTCA claims are for…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Fowler v. UPMC SHADYSIDECourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2009
- Federal Deposit Insurance v. MeyerSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Berkovitz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- In Re Nickelodeon Consumer Privacy LitigationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2016
- Gabriel v. Giant Eagle, Inc.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2015
- Schreiner v. HodgeSupreme Court of Kansas · 2022
- Prukala v. ElleDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2014
- Blythe Recycling and Demolition Site Holdings, Inc. v. Bernard Kuperavage and KK Coal, LLC f/k/a K. & K. Coal CompanyDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2026
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.