MOSS et al v. AARON'S, INC.

Filing 41

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THAT PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO DISMISS DEFENDANTS COUNTERCLAIMS (DOC. 38) IT IS ORDERED THAT: PLAINTIFFS MOTION IS DENIED AS TO COUNTERCLAIMS ONE (BREACH OF CONTRACT), TWO (CONVERSION) AND FOUR (UNJUST ENRICHMENT). AS TO COUNTERCLAIM THREE (FRAUD), THE MOTION IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. THE MOTION IS DENIED TO THE EXTENT THE COUNTERCLAIM ALLEGES FRAUD AGAINST PLAINTIFFS WITH RESPECT TO THE SPECIFIC PIECES OF ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT THE COUNTERCLAIM ALLEGES THAT THEY FRAUD ULENTLY ACQUIRED. THE MOTION IS GRANTED TO THE EXTENT THE COUNTERCLAIM ALLEGES FRAUD AGAINST OTHER PERSONS WITH RESPECT TO OTHER PIECES OF EQUIPMENT AND SUCH CLAIMS ARE DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE WENDY BEETLESTONE ON 5/5/15. 5/5/15 ENTERED AND COPIES EMAILED.(rf, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
SEENA MOSS and CHASE PARKER,
Plaintiffs,

CIVIL ACTION

v.
AARON’S, INC.,

NO. 14-3753
Defendant.
ORDER

AND NOW, this 5th day of May, 2015, upon consideration of Plaintiffs’ Motion to
Dismiss Defendant’s Counterclaims Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) (ECF No. 38), the briefing
thereon and the opposition thereto, it is ORDERED that:
Plaintiffs’ Motion is DENIED as to counterclaims one (breach of contract), two
(conversion) and four (unjust enrichment);
As to counterclaim three (fraud), the Motion is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED
IN PART. The Motion is DENIED to the extent the counterclaim alleges fraud against
Plaintiffs with respect to the specific pieces of electronic equipment the counterclaim alleges that
they fraudulently acquired. The Motion is GRANTED to the extent the counterclaim alleges
fraud against other persons with respect to other pieces of equipment and such claims are
DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

BY THE COURT:

/S/WENDY BEETLESTONE
_______________________________
WENDY BEETLESTONE, J.