Legal Opinion
Sklarsky v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided February 10, 1931PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WOOLSEY, District Judge.
The motion to remand is denied. Furthermore, as it appears on the face of the papers before mo that the plaintiff lias exhausted the remedies which he may have had against the removing defendant for the wrong alleged, I give summary judgment to the removing defendant, dismissing the complaint with costs.
As this disposes of all aspects of the ease involving federal jurisdiction, I remand the remaining part of this controversy to the New York Supreme Court for Bronx Comity.
I. I have before me on this motion the following papers:(1) The notice of motion for remand of this…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Angle v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Bitterman v. Louisville & Nashville RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Beekman v. MarstersMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
- Di Menna v. . Cooper Evans Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1917
- Reilly v. . Sicilian Asphalt Paving Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1902
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Goetz v. Interlake S. S. Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1931
- Maryland v. RobinsonDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1947
- Bede Steam Shipping Co. v. New York Trust Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1931
- Societe Vinicole De Champagne v. Mumm Champagne & Importation Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1935
- United States v. Newbury Mfg. Co.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1941
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.