Legal Opinion

Lojeski v. Boandl

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided January 23, 1985No. Civ. A. 84-3591PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

WEINER, District Judge.

Presently before the court is the motion of defendants, all of whom are employees of the United States, Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service (IRS), to dismiss, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(5) and 12(b)(6) the complaint on the grounds that this court lacks jurisdiction over the defendants. In the alternative, defendants move for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56 on the grounds that there are no material issues of fact and that this court lacks jurisdiction over the defendants. For the reasons which follow the motions are…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of NarcoticsSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  3. Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  4. United States v. Diebold, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
  5. Bell v. HoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1946

26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Benter v. PeckDistrict Court, S.D. Iowa · 1993
  2. Andrews v. CrumpDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · 1996

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

Powered by the Exa API