basis in fact and without any purpose to prosecute the cause in good faith against [the defendants].” Wilson, 257 U.S. at 98, 42 S.Ct. 35. A finding of fraudulent joinder “bears an implicit finding that the plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action against the fraudulently joined defendant^].” Polyplastics, Inc. v. Transconex, Inc., 713 F.2d 875, 877 (1st Cir.1983); see also Coughlin v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 776 F.Supp. 626, 628 (D.Mass.1991). The party seeking removal bears the l court on the theory that The Brigham was fraudulently joined to defeat diversity. The Plaintiffs are residents of Massachusetts. Medtronic is a foreign corporation with its principal place of business in Minnesota. The Brigham is a Massachusetts corporation with 18810 (Mass.Super. Dec. 19, 2003) (<HOLDING>). Considering the pharmacy cases cited by the
holding that  1983 claim accrues when plaintiff knows or has reason to know of injury holding that a  1983 claim accrues when plaintiff knows or has reason to know of injury holding that a pharmacist has a duty to warn when he or she knows of a risk to that particular customer holding that when business is prone to attract crime because of the particular character of the business or its previous experience operator has duty to exercise reasonable care to protect invitees from intentional injuries caused by third parties if he knows or has reason to know from observation or past experience that criminal acts are likely to occur either generally or at some particular time holding that the defendant pharmacist had undertaken a duty to accurately warn of a drugs side effects with respect to the warning actually given but not a duty to warn of all possible side effects of the medication