Legal Opinion
Hylte Bruks Aktiebolag v. Babcock & Wilcox Co.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided May 14, 1969No. 68 Civ. 3462PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
COOPER, District Judge.
Plaintiffs Hylte Bruks Aktiebolag (Hylte Bruks) and Nymolla move pursuant to Rule 12(b) (1), F.R.Civ.P., to dismiss plaintiff Hylte Bruks’ claims against defendant Babcock & Wilcox Co. (B & W) for lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter. Alternatively, plaintiffs seek pursuant to Rule 41(a) (2), F.R.Civ. P., an order permitting them to voluntarily dismiss without condition Hylte Bruks’ claims.
Defendant, on the other hand, opposes dismissal for want of jurisdiction. Additionally, while not opposing voluntary dismissal, it urges that such dismissal be…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Saint Paul Mercury Indemnity Co. v. Red Cab Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Fleischmann Distilling Corp. v. Maier Brewing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Gibbs v. BuckSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Thomson v. GaskillSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Farmer v. Arabian American Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1964
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Gaf Corporation v. Transamerica Insurance Company. Gaf Corporation v. Transamerica Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1981
- Uniroyal, Inc. v. HellerDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1974
- Pariente v. Scott Meredith Literary Agency, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1991
- Watson v. ClarkDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 1989
- Eugene R. Signorile, V, Quaker Oats CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1974
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.