Legal Opinion
Cyr v. Mayo
District Court, D. Vermont
Decided October 31, 1984No. Civ. No. 84-102Published
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
BILLINGS, District Judge.
This case is before the court on the motion of third-party defendant United States to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. For the reasons recited below, that motion is GRANTED and the action is REMANDED to the Lamoille Superior Court of the State of Vermont.
FACTS
In January, 1984, plaintiff Marie R. Cyr filed a complaint in Lamoille Superior Court alleging that defendants Cecil Mayo, Jr.; Nathan Barbour; and John Does # 1-10 had constructed and sold to her a defective house. She asserted claims against the defendants for breach of…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Minnesota v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Lambert Run Coal Co. v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Arizona v. ManypennySupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- The State of Washington, Etc. v. The American League of Professional Baseball ClubsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1972
- Reid v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1983
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.