Legal Opinion
Dobrovich v. Hamel
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided October 20, 1998No. Nos. 3:96 CV 865(GLG), 3:97 CV 467(GLG)Published
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM DECISION
GOETTEL, District Judge.
Following this Court’s decision in Dobro-vich v. Hotchkiss, 14 F.Supp.2d 232 (D.Conn. 1998), that admiralty jurisdiction was lacking and, there being no other asserted basis for jurisdiction, that the case should be dis*65missed, the defendant in Dobrovich v. Hamel made a similar motion. We were a bit surprised at this motion because, at oral argument in the Hotchkiss case, plaintiffs’ counsel informed the Court that there was an allegation of diversity jurisdiction in the Hamel ease. It now appears that representation was incorrect. It is clear that…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. World University Inc., Santa Barbara Center CorporationCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1992
- Houbigant, Inc. v. ACB Mercantile, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1996
- Cooper v. ShumwayCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1985
- National Petrochemical Co. of Iran v. M/T Stolt SheafCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1991
- Dobrovich v. HotchkissDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 1998