Schott v. City of Kingman
District Court, D. Arizona
1Opinion of the Court
FINDINGS OF FACT CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND JUDGMENT
CRAIG, District Judge.
Plaintiff, a resident of California, seeks to recover reimbursement for expenditures incurred in the construction of water lines which defendant, an incorporated municipality and a subdivision of the State of Arizona, is presently using to deliver water to individual users. Plaintiff prays for the reasonable value of the water lines under a theory of implied contract, or alternatively, unjust enrichment.
This Court’s diversity jurisdiction is invoked under Title 28 U.S.C. § 1332. The claim is in excess of $10,000.
*428This matter…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Bernhardt v. Polygraphic Co. of America, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1956
- Angel v. BullingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Seguros Tepeyac, S. A., Compania Mexicana De Seguros Generales v. James L. JerniganCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1969
- Sherrill v. McShanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1966
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Anna Mae Schott v. City of Kingman, an Incorporated Arizona MunicipalityCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1972