Singleton v. Searail Industries, Inc.
District Court, S.D. Alabama
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
HOWARD, District Judge.
This cause is before the Court on a motion to dismiss filed by defendants Searail Industries and Baldwin Warehouses, Inc. (“movants”). Movants urge that this Court has no subject matter jurisdiction over this action. Alternatively, movants argue that the only possible basis of subject matter jurisdiction over them derives from the principle of pendent party jurisdiction, which they contend does not apply in the circumstances of this case.
I. SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
This action was originally filed in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County. Customs officers…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Bell v. HoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Aldinger v. HowardSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Illinois v. City of MilwaukeeSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Wheeldin v. WheelerSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Twigg v. Hercules CorporationWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1991
- Twigg v. Hercules CorporationWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1991