HILTON v. PORCH.COM et al

Filing 43

MEMORANDUM ORDER denying 14 Defendant's Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. Signed by Judge David S. Cercone on 3/21/18. (mwm)

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

ZACHARY HILTON,
Plaintiff,
v.
PORCH.COM and MATTHEW
EHRLICHMAN,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

2:17cv274
Electronic Filing

MEMORANDUM ORDER
AND NOW, this 21st day of March, 2018, upon due consideration of defendant's motion
to dismiss and the parties' submissions in conjunction therewith, IT IS ORDERED that [14] the
motion be, and the same hereby is, denied.
"To survive a motion to dismiss, a civil plaintiff must allege facts that 'raise a right to
relief above the speculative level on the assumption that the allegations in the complaint are true
(even if doubtful in fact).'" Victaulic Co. v. Tieman, 499 F.3d 227, 234 (3d Cir. 2007) (quoting
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 127 S. Ct. 1955, 1965, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007)).
This is not to be understood as imposing a probability standard at the pleading stage. Ashcroft v.
Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) ("'The plausibility standard is not akin to a 'probability
requirement,' but it asks for more than a sheer possibility that a defendant has acted
unlawfully.'"); Phillips v. County of Allegheny, 515 F.3d 224, 235 (3d Cir. 2008) (same).
Instead, "[t]he Supreme Court's Twombly formulation of the pleading standard can be summed
up thus: 'stating ... a claim requires a complaint with enough factual matter (taken as true) to
suggest the required element ... [and provides] enough facts to raise a reasonable expectation that
discovery will reveal evidence of the necessary element.'" Phillips, 515 F.3d at 235; see also
Wilkerson v. New Media Technology Charter School Inc., 522 F.3d 315, 321 (3d Cir. 2008)

("'The complaint must state 'enough facts to raise a reasonable expectation that discovery will
reveal evidence of the necessary element.'") (quoting Phillips, 515 F.3d at 235) (citations
omitted). "Once a claim has been stated adequately, it may be supported by showing any set of
facts consistent with the allegations in the complaint." Twombly, 550 U.S. at 563.
In contrast, a defense to a stated claim will be recognized at the pleading stage only
where the allegations of the complaint unequivocally establish the defense as a matter of law or
an affirmative defense appears unanswered on the face of the complaint. Victaulic Co., 499 F.3d
at 234-35; accord Penn Warranty Corp. v. Edwards, 2018 WL 994669, *6 (M.D. Pa., February
21, 2018). Defenses grounded in fact-based inquires properly are deferred beyond the pleading
stage. Victaulic Co., 499 F.3d at 234-35; Penn Warranty, supra at *6-7; accord Khosla
Ventures, LLC v. Rolls-Royce Canada Ltd., 2013 WL 4780431, *4 (D.N.J., Sept. 5, 2013)
("Here, the Court does not find that the facts as alleged in the Amended Complaint are sufficient
to show that Khosla was adequately informed upon agreeing to the work and upon signing the
STC so as to waive any claim of fraud . . . ."); Rivard v. Bello, 2013 WL 1285414, *3 (E.D. Pa.
March 27, 2013) ("Because Plaintiffs' fraud claim puts the enforceability of the release at issue
and because the resolution of this claim depends on facts which have not been established on this
record, the Court cannot, at this stage of the proceedings, hold that the release is enforceable and
bars all of Plaintiffs' claims.").
Here, defendant seeks to progress well beyond the factual averments in the complaint and
venture into the parties' understandings regarding the meaning of the terms of the employment
contract and the way it would be interpreted and carried-out. The complaint neither renders
defendant's interpretations certain as a matter of law nor leaves them unanswered on its face. To
the contrary, the averments of the complaint displace defendant's assertions. Consequently, such

2

inquiries must await summary judgment and/or trial and defendant's motion properly has been
denied.
s/David Stewart Cercone
David Stewart Cercone
Senior United States District Judge

cc:

James W. Southworth, Esquire
Michael Droke, Esquire
Eric L. Schnabel, Esquire
(Via CM/ECF Electronic Mail)

3