Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Eugene Oak v. Michael C. Winter

District Court, C.D. California

Decided August 30, 2022No. 2:22-cv-00517Unknown

1Opinion

Case 2:22-cv-00517-MEMF-PD Document 252 Filed 08/30/22 Page 1 of 6 Page ID #:6052 1 O 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 Case No.: 2:22-cv- 00517-MEMF(PDx) 11 EUGENE OAK, 12 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY JURISIDICTION IS PROPER IN LIGHT OF 13 v. ROOKER-FELDMAN AND CLAIM PRECLUSION PUR SUANT TO

28 U.S.C. § 14

1738 MICHAEL WINTER, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 19 20 On January 23, 2022, Plaintiff Eugene Oak (“Oak”), appearing pro se, filed a Complaint 21 against eighteen defendants alleging ten causes of action: (1) violation of the Due Process…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  2. Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2006
  3. Ruhrgas Ag v. Marathon Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1999
  4. Kremer v. Chemical Construction Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
  5. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. Brotherhood of Locomotive EngineersSupreme Court of the United States · 1970

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

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

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API