Opinion ID: 519240
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: the third party verification issue

Text: 56 The district court dismissed plaintiffs' complaint with regard to the third party verification allegations for failure to state a due process claim. The court noted that the individual claims presented in the complaint were capable of being handled through the administrative hearing process and that the regulations at issue comport with due process and federal law. 57 Our standard of review for Rule 12(b)(6) dismissals was stated in Wisniewski v. Johns-Manville Corp., 759 F.2d 271, 273 (3d Cir.1985) (citations omitted): 58 The standard by which the orders must be tested is whether taking the allegations of the complaint as true, ... and viewing them liberally giving plaintiffs the benefit of all inferences which fairly may be drawn therefrom, ... it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff[s] can prove no set of facts in support of [their] claim which would entitle [them] to relief. 59 Although the district court apparently believed that plaintiffs were challenging the third party verification regulations themselves, in fact, the second amended complaint makes clear that the plaintiffs are challenging the DPW's local offices' patterns and practices that violate these statutes and regulations. Given the allegations in the complaint and taking them as true, plaintiffs have stated a claim that would entitle them to relief. Plaintiffs should be given the opportunity to demonstrate instances where defendants' behavior violated their due process rights as well as other federal statutes and regulations. Therefore, with regard to the third party verification issue, we will reverse and remand to the district court to permit the case to proceed.