Legal Opinion
Marshall v. Grant
District Court, E.D. New York
Decided November 6, 2007No. Civil Action 06-5358 (DRH)(MLO)PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
HURLEY, Senior District Judge.
Plaintiff, John Marshall (“Plaintiff’ or “Marshall”), commenced this action asserting claims of fraud, fraudulent concealment, breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment against the Defendants. Presently before the Court is Defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint on the grounds that (1) the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, or (2) the claims are subject to dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) as barred by res judicata. For the reasons set forth below, the motion to dismiss is granted.
Background
Plaintiff…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. FeldmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Industries Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2005
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- In Re WardUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. New York · 2010
- Shetiwy v. Midland Credit ManagementDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2013
- In Re SandersUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. New York · 2009
- In re 231 Fourth Avenue Lyceum, LLCUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. New York · 2014
- Anctil v. Ally Financial, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2014
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.