Bishop v. GNC FRANCHISING LLC
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
SCHWAB, District Judge.
I.Introduction
Defendants have filed a motion to dismiss (document no. 9) all counts of plaintiffs’ first amended complaint. After careful consideration of defendants’ motion and plaintiffs’ response, and their respective memoranda of law, this Court will grant in part and deny in part defendants’ motion to dismiss.
II.Statement of Facts
According to their amended complaint, plaintiffs Harold E. Bishop, Patricia Bishop and Alternative Health, Inc., own and operate two franchises under franchise agreements with GNC Franchising LLC, General Nutrition…
2Cases cited59 opinions
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A.Supreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- United States v. Grinnell Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1966
54 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Cottman Transmission Systems, LLC v. KershnerDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2008
- Drug Mart Pharmacy Corp. v. American Home Products Corp.District Court, E.D. New York · 2007
- Crown Coal & Coke Co. v. Powhatan Mid-Vol Coal Sales, L.L.C.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2013
- Cottman Transmission Systems, LLC v. KershnerDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2007
- GNC Franchising, Inc. v. O'BRIENDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2006
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.