Legal Opinion
Gionfriddo v. Salaf
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided September 29, 2004No. 3:03-cv-01585PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RULING ON APPORTIONMENT DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS APPORTIONMENT COMPLAINT
ELLEN BREE BURNS, Senior District Judge.
INTRODUCTION
The Apportionment Defendant, United States of America (the “Government”), moves pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1), to dismiss the Apportionment Complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Robert Salaf, Defendant and Apportionment Plaintiff (Salaf), brought this Apportionment Complaint in Connecticut Superi- or Court pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes, Sections 52-102b and 52-572h (2004) 1 against federal postal employee Hector L. Carrero (“Carrero”).…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Natalia Makarova v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2000
- Owen Equipment & Erection Co. v. KrogerSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Minnesota v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Lambert Run Coal Co. v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Freeman v. Bee MacHine Co., IncSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Barnaby v. QuintosDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2005
- Bernard v. Yale UniversityDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2021
- Bernard v. Yale UniversityDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2021