Paul Marsh, Inc. v. Edward A. Goodman Co., Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
GOETTEL, District Judge:
It is one of the sacred commandments of federal jurisprudence that the federal courts must protect their subject matter jurisdiction. Ordinarily, one of the parties is more than willing to point out a jurisdictional defect. But when, as here, the parties remain silent, it is the Court’s duty to dismiss the action sua sponte if it lacks subject matter jurisdiction. Fed.R. Civ.P. 12(h).
I. Background
Because the pleadings are of the most cursory sort, the facts giving rise to this litigation are somewhat obscure. All that appears is that some years ago the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Kossick v. United Fruit Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1961
- The Propeller Genesee Chief v. FitzhughSupreme Court of the United States · 1852
- New Jersey Steam Navigation Company v. MERCHANTS'BANK.Supreme Court of the United States · 1848
- People's Ferry Company of Boston v. BeersSupreme Court of the United States · 1858
- De Lovio v. BoitU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1815
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Atlantic Mutual Insurance Company v. Balfour Maclaine International Ltd.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1992
- Atlantic Mutual Insurance v. Balfour Maclaine International Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1992
- Illinois Constructors Corp. v. Morency & Associates, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1992
- Continental Cameras Co., Inc. v. Foa & Son Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1987
- Inversiones Calmer, S.A. v. C.E. Heath & Co.District Court, D. Puerto Rico · 1988
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.