From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Marion v. S.D. Goldfine Company

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
May 27, 2004
CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-7076 (E.D. Pa. May. 27, 2004)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-7076

May 27, 2004


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER


On March 1, 2004, I entered an order granting in part, and denying in part, defendants' motion to dismiss the first amended complaint. Upon further consideration, and for the reasons stated in the Memorandum and Order filed this date in the companion case of David H. Marion v. TDI, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 02-7032, I conclude that plaintiff does indeed have standing to assert the claims in question and that the first amended complaint survives dismissal under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). It is therefore ordered:

1. This court's Order of March 1, 2004, is VACATED.
2. Defendants' motion to dismiss the first amended complaint is DENIED, without prejudice to defendants' right to file a properly supported motion for summary judgment, if warranted by the facts.


Summaries of

Marion v. S.D. Goldfine Company

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
May 27, 2004
CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-7076 (E.D. Pa. May. 27, 2004)
Case details for

Marion v. S.D. Goldfine Company

Case Details

Full title:DAVID H. MARION, as Receiver for Bentley Financial Services, Inc. v. S.D…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: May 27, 2004

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-7076 (E.D. Pa. May. 27, 2004)