Kilroy v. Mayhew
District Court, D. Maine
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS
SINGAL, District Judge.
Before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Docket # 7) Plaintiffs Complaint. As explained herein, the line of cases starting with Burford v. Sun Oil Co., 319 U.S. 315, 63 S.Ct. 1098, 87 L.Ed. 1424 (1943), requires that the Court ABSTAIN. Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is therefore GRANTED.
I. LEGAL STANDARD
Defendant moves to dismiss this case under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). Generally, under Rule 12(b)(1), a party may move to dismiss a case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See, e.g., Am. Fiber &…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Younger v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Industries Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Middlesex County Ethics Committee v. Garden State Bar Ass'nSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Burford v. Sun Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Quackenbush v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Courthouse News Service v. GabelDistrict Court, D. Vermont · 2021
- HALSEY v. FEDCAP REHABILITATION SERVICES INCDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2023
- NICHOLAS v. CAMUSODistrict Court, D. Maine · 2023
- SPARKS v. MILLSDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2021