Legal Opinion
Bacardi v. Bacardi Corp.
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided January 21, 1988No. Civ. A. 87-621-JJFPublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
FARNAN, District Judge.
Plaintiffs Daniel F. Bacardi and Adolfo Comas Bacardi 1 have filed a motion to remand this action to the Delaware Court of Chancery. Defendant, Bacardi Corporation, removed this action from state court on the ground that Count III of plaintiffs’ complaint arises under the Securities and Exchange Act (the “1934 Act”), 15 U.S.C. § 78a et seq. The Court has reviewed the briefs of the parties and heard oral argument and concluded that plaintiffs’ motion to remand must be denied.
FACTS
The plaintiffs’ complaint sets forth a detailed factual account of the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- United Mine Workers of America v. GibbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Gully v. First Nat. Bank in MeridianSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Taylor v. AndersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- First Jersey Securities, Inc. v. BergenCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1979
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Hill v. MarstonCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1994
- Hunter v. Greenwood Trust Co.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1992
- Horowitz v. Marlton Oncology, P.C.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1999
- Hill v. MarstonCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1994
- RAMOS v. JETBLUE AIRWAYS CORPORATIONDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2022
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.