Legal Opinion
Connecticut v. Levi Strauss & Co.
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided May 31, 1979No. Civ. No. H-78-455PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RULING ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR REMAND
NEWMAN, District Judge.
The State of Connecticut seeks to remand the antitrust damage suit that it brought in state court against Levi Strauss & Company (Levi Strauss), which Levi Strauss removed on both federal question and diversity grounds. 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b). Connecticut claims that its suit involves no federal question, 28 U.S.C. § 1331, and that diversity jurisdiction is unavailable because Connecticut is not a citizen and because the jurisdictional amount requirement has not been met, 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
The action was filed in the Hartford Superior…
2Cases cited70 opinions
- Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Burford v. Sun Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Gully v. First Nat. Bank in MeridianSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Pike v. Bruce Church, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
65 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- In re Standard & Poor's Rating Agency LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2014
- STATE OF NY BY ABRAMS v. General Motors Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1982
- People of the State of Illinois v. Kerr-Mcgee Chemical Corporation, and City of West Chicago, a Municipal Corporation v. Kerr-Mcgee Chemical Corporation, a Delaware CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1982
- Hood Ex Rel. Mississippi v. Microsoft Corp.District Court, S.D. Mississippi · 2006
- WEST VIRGINIA EX REL. McGRAW v. Comcast Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2010
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.