Legal Opinion
Rustom v. Atlantic Richfield Co.
District Court, C.D. California
Decided September 4, 1985No. CV 85-4499 AWTPublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
TASHIMA, District Judge.
This action was commenced in state court in 1981. A Second Amended Complaint was filed in June, 1985 and the removal petition was filed within 30 days after it was received by the petitioner defendants. 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b). The Second Amended Complaint expressly asserted for the first time a claim under Title I of the Petroleum Marketing Practices Act (the “PMPA” or “Act”), 15 U.S.C. § 2801 et seq., arising from the alleged wrongful termination of a franchise relationship by the defendant franchisors, Atlantic Richfield Company and ARCO…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Charles Dowd Box Co. v. CourtneySupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Gulf Offshore Co. v. Mobil Oil Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Lambert Run Coal Co. v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
- General Investment Co. v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Sierra On-Line, Inc. v. Phoenix Software, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Timothy O'Shea T/a Tim's Amoco v. Amoco Oil CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1989
- C.N. Brown Co. v. GillenSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1990
- Winks v. Feeney Oil Co., Inc.District Court, C.D. Illinois · 1990
- Stipelcovich v. Directv, Inc.District Court, E.D. Texas · 2001
- Johnson v. Mobil Oil Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.