The opinion of the court was delivered by: Terrence F. McVerry, Judge United States District Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT
Presently before the Court is the MOTION TO DISMISS, with brief in support, filed by Defendant, Church Mutual Insurance Company (Document Nos. 3 and 4, respectively), the BRIEF AND RESPONSE in opposition filed by Plaintiff, Gussie M. Walker Community Center (Document Nos. 7 and 8, respectively) and the REPLY BRIEF filed by Defendant (Document No. 11).
For the reasons that follow, the Motion to Dismiss will be denied without prejudice to Defendant to revisit these issues at summary judgment after discovery has been completed.
Plaintiff initiated this lawsuit on November 17, 2007, by the filing of a five-count Complaint in the Court of Common Pleas of Lawrence County, in which it alleged the following causes of action:
Count 1 - Reformation - Based on Mutual Mistake of the Parties;
Count 2 - Reformation - Based on Reasonable Expectation of the Plaintiff;
Count 3 - Breach of Contract;
Count 4 - Relief under the Pennsylvania Bad Faith Statute, 42 Pa. C.S. § 8371; and
Count 5 - Relief under the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, 73 P.S. §§ 201-1, et seq.*fn1
On December 4, 2007, Defendant removed the lawsuit to this Court on the basis of complete diversity jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1441.
Defendant has filed the instant motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Defendant contends that the entire Complaint should be dismissed due to the "inherent contradictions in the allegations of the complaint, together with the absence of plausible facts to support the causes of action." Plaintiff has responded in opposition and this matter is now ripe for disposition.
A motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) challenges the sufficiency of the Complaint filed by plaintiff. Accordingly, the Court must "accept all factual allegations as true, construe the complaint in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, and determine whether, under any reasonable reading of the complaint, the plaintiff may be entitled to relief." Phillips v. County of Allegheny, -- F.3d --- , 2008 WL 305025 (3d Cir. Feb. 5, 2008) (quoting Pinker v. Roche Holdings, Ltd., 292 F.3d 361, 374 n.7 (3d Cir. 2002)). See also Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, -- U.S. --, 127 ...