LOEFFLER THOMAS P.C. v. FISHMAN et al
ORDER THAT UPON CONSIDERATION OF THE MOTIONS TO DISMISS FILED BY EACH OF THE NAMED DEFENDANTS (ECF NOS. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11), AND ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT THEREOF, AND IN OPPOSITION THERETO, IT IS ORDERED THAT THE MOTIONS ARE GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART, ETC. SIGNED BY HONORABLE R. BARCLAY SURRICK ON 4/11/16. 4/13/16 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED AND FAXED BY CHAMBERS.(ti, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
LOEFFLER THOMAS P.C. f/k/a
LOEFFLER THOMAS TOUZALIN LLP
SIMON FISHMAN, ET AL.
AND NOW, this
11th day of
, 2016, upon consideration of the
Motions to Dismiss filed by each of the named Defendants (ECF Nos. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11), 1
and all documents submitted in support thereof, and in opposition thereto, it is ORDERED that
the Motions are GRANTED in part, and DENIED in part, as follows:
Count 4 (breach of contract), Count 5 (account stated), and Count 6 (quantum
meruit) with respect to the Third Circuit Appeal are DISMISSED.
Count 7 (breach of contract), Count 8 (account stated), and Count 9 (quantum
meruit) with respect to the Stretton Matter are DISMISSED.
Count 10 (breach of contract), Count 11 (account stated), and Count 12 (quantum
meruit) with respect to the Ferrara Matter are DISMISSED.
Count 13 (pre-judgment attachment of assets) is DISMISSED.
The following Motions to Dismiss were filed by Defendants: Samuel Fishman (ECF
No. 4); Capital Car Co., Cars & Trucks, LLC, Seed Acquisitions, LLC, and Seed Acquisitions,
Inc. (ECF No. 5); Law Office of Samuel Fishman, P.C. (ECF No. 6); Daniel Fishman (ECF No.
7); Eric Fishman (ECF No. 8); Eugene Reed (ECF No. 9); Miriam Fishman (ECF No. 10); and
Simon Fishman (ECF No. 11).
The Motions to Dismiss are DENIED with respect to the claims related to the
Capital Car Matter (Counts 1 through 3).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
BY THE COURT:
R. BARCLAY SURRICK, J.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?