Legal Opinion
Ross v. Mitsui Fudosan, Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided April 22, 1998No. 97 CIV. 0975(PKL)PublishedCited by 51 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
LEISURE, District Judge.
Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, defendants Mitsui Fudosan, Inc. (“Mitsui”), Rockefeller Center Management Corporation (“RCMC”), New-mark & Company Real Estate Inc. (“New-mark”), Roger Mullarkey, Patricia Ray, and Jesse Rubens seek dismissal of all or part of the claims pending against them in the instant matter. For the reasons stated below, defendants’ motions are granted in part and denied in part.
BACKGROUND
The following facts are taken from the allegations in the Complaint, which the Court must accept as true for…
2Cases cited45 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- United Mine Workers of America v. GibbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Carnegie-Mellon University v. CohillSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Carole Tomka v. The Seiler Corporation, Daniel Lucey, David Polonsky and Timothy ConroyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995
- Murphy v. American Home Products Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1983
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by51 opinions
- Hall v. City of White PlainsDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2002
- Swarna v. Al-AwadiCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2010
- Wahlstrom v. Metro-North Commuter RailroadDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2000
- Penny Ferris v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., and Michael YoungCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2001
- Henneberry v. Sumitomo Corp. of AmericaDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2006
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.