Legal Opinion

Tannenbaum v. Envirodyne Engineers, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Illinois

Decided May 30, 1985No. 84 C 10656PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

BUA, District Judge.

Before the Court is the defendant Envirodyne’s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b). For the reasons stated herein, defendant’s motion to dismiss is granted.

I. FACTS

The plaintiff is an engineer. In September 1975 he entered into an employment contract with Westenhoff & Novick, Inc. The defendant Envirodyne is successor to Westenhoff & Novick. The plaintiff was hired to serve as Project Manager for the design and construction of a certain project in the Republic of El Salvador for a period of 18 months beginning' in July 1975. Plaintiff…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Ray B. Woodbury v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1963
  2. Charles H. Blanchard, D/B/A Blanchard Construction Co. v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company, Charles H. Blanchard, D/B/A Blanchard Construction Co. v. United States of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1965
  3. United States v. WelbornDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · 1980

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Lundstrum v. LyngCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1991
  2. Lundstrum v. LyngCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1991
  3. Coffey v. United States Ex Rel. Commodity Credit Corp.District Court, D. Kansas · 1986
  4. Karl, Robert v. United States of AmericaDistrict Court, W.D. Wisconsin · 2022

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API