Legal Opinion

Richardson v. Diagnostic Rehabilitation Center

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided July 27, 1993No. Civ. A. 92-5649PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM

GILES, District Judge.

Defendant has moved pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. For the reasons stated below, the motion is denied.

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

The allegations of the complaint, which we assume to be true for the purposes of deciding this motion to dismiss, see, e.g., Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 89 S.Ct. 1843, 23 L.Ed.2d 404 (1969), are as follows. Defendant Diagnostic Rehabilitation Center (“DRC”) is in the business of providing drug and alcohol treatment services.…

2Cases cited33 opinions

  1. Irwin v. Department of Veterans AffairsSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  2. Jenkins v. McKeithenSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  3. Patterson v. McLean Credit UnionSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  4. Baldwin County Welcome Center v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  5. Wards Cove Packing Co. v. AtonioSupreme Court of the United States · 1989

28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Woods v. BentsenDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1995
  2. Stambaugh v. Kansas Department of CorrectionsDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 1994
  3. Olds v. Alamo Group (KS), Inc.District Court, D. Kansas · 1995
  4. Scary v. Philadelphia Gas WorksDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2001
  5. Fields v. BlakeDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2004

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API