Eagle Traffic Control v. Addco
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
JOYNER, District Judge.
We address today the motion filed pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) by Defendant in this diversity case, in which it seeks the dismissal of Plaintiffs request for punitive damages. For the reasons that follow, the motion to dismiss will be denied.
I. BACKGROUND
For the purposes of a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, we must accept as true the facts as alleged by the non-moving party, which are as follows. The plaintiff, Eagle Traffic Control (“Eagle”), which is in the business of providing safety equipment to highway work sites, contracted with the defendant,…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Hishon v. King & SpaldingSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Feld v. MerriamSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
- Schrob v. CattersonCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1991
- Ala, Inc. v. Ccair, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1994
- Martin v. Johns-Manville Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Soufflas v. Zimmer, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2007
- Anderson v. Nationwide Insurance EnterpriseDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2002
- Martin v. FinleyDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2018
- Sullivan v. Modern Group Ltd., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, York County2000
- Rivero v. Timblin, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lancaster County2010
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.