Legal Opinion
Fulk v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co.
District Court, M.D. North Carolina
Decided August 4, 2014No. 1:13CV234PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
OSTEEN, JR., District Judge.
Presently before the court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 10). Defendants have filed a memorandum (Doc. 11) in support of their motion, Plaintiffs have filed a response in opposition (Doc. 20), and Defendants have filed a reply (Doc. 21).1 Defendants’ motion is *752now ripe for adjudication, and for the reasons that follow, this court will grant the motion in part and deny it in part.
1. BACKGROUND
The following facts are presented in the light most favorable to Plaintiffs. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173…
2Cases cited53 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Rogers v. Missouri Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Urie v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Kerns v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2009
48 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Pathfinder Software, LLC v. Core Cashless, LLCDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · 2015
- Weatherford U.S., L.P. v. U.S. Dep't of LaborCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2023
- Estate of Phillip Raymond Morgan, by Administrator, Personal Representative, Kera Morgan v. Union Pacific Railroad Company, a Delaware corporationSupreme Court of Iowa · 2025
- Estate of Phillip Raymond Morgan, by Administrator, Personal Representative, Kera Morgan v. Union Pacific Railroad Company, a Delaware corporationSupreme Court of Iowa · 2025