Legal Opinion

Sergio v. Doe

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided February 14, 1991No. Civ. A. 90-6749PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM

LUDWIG, District Judge.

In this § 1983 action, the amended complaint asserts malicious prosecution and intentional infliction of emotional distress as actionable torts and outrageous conduct and loss of consortium as pendent state claims. Defendants move to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). 1 Specifically, defendants claim that (1) plaintiffs were not deprived of any constitutional liberty or property interest; (2) Nancy Sergio lacks standing to assert a § 1983 claim; (3) defendants’ actions were at most negligent and,…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  2. Graham v. ConnorSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  3. Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
  4. Anderson v. CreightonSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  5. Bell v. WolfishSupreme Court of the United States · 1979

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Bey v. City of PhiladelphiaDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1998
  2. Temple-Inland, Inc. v. CookDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 2016
  3. Bieros v. NicolaDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1994
  4. Puricelli v. Borough of MorrisvilleDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1993
  5. Barkauskie v. Indian River School DistrictDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1996

5 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