MURPHY v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. et al

Filing 158

ORDER THAT DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS COUNT I OF PLAINTIFFS AMENDED COMPLAINT IS DENIED. DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS COUNTS II, III, AND IV OF PLAINTIFFS AMENDED COMPLAINT ARE HEREBY DENIED DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS COUNTS II, III, IV, V, AND VI OF PLAINTIFFS AMENDED COMPLAINT IS GRANTED. ALL CLAIMS AGAINST THESE DEFENDANTS ARE DISMISSED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE R. BARCLAY SURRICK ON 3/14/2016. 3/15/2016 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED AND FAXED BY CHAMBERS.(sg, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

BRIAN D. MURPHY,
Individually and on behalf of other
similarly situated current and former
homeowners in Pennsylvania
v.
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., ET AL.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CIVIL ACTION
NO. 13-5719

ORDER
AND NOW, this 14th day of March , 2016, upon consideration of Motion of
Defendants Bank of America, N.A. and the Bank of New York Mellon, N.A., to Dismiss
Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (ECF No. 129), and the Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended
Complaint Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of Defendants McCabe Weisberg & Conway, P.C.,
Terrence J. McCabe, Marc S. Weisberg, and Edward D. Conway (ECF No. 130), and all
documents submitted in support thereof, and in opposition thereto, it is ORDERED as follows:
1. Defendants Bank of America, N.A.’s and the Bank of New York Mellon, N.A.’s Motion
to Dismiss Count I (breach of contract) of Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint is DENIED.
2. Defendants Bank of America, N.A.’s and the Bank of New York Mellon, N.A.’s Motion
to Dismiss Counts II (Act 6 violation), III (Act 91 violation), and IV (Pennsylvania’s
Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law violation) of Plaintiff’s Amended
Complaint is GRANTED. Counts II, III, and IV are hereby DISMISSED.
3. Defendants McCabe Weisberg & Conway, P.C.’s, Terrence J. McCabe’s, Marc S.
Weisberg’s, and Edward D. Conway’s Motion to Dismiss Counts II (Act 6 violation), III
(Act 91 violation), IV (Pennsylvania’s Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection
Law violation), V (Fair Debt Collection Practices Act violation), and VI (Racketeer

Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act violation) of Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint is
GRANTED. All claims against these Defendants are DISMISSED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

BY THE COURT:

____________________________
R. BARCLAY SURRICK, J.

2