Legal Opinion
Nordbrock v. United States
District Court, D. Arizona
Decided July 30, 2001No. CV-99-444-TUC-JMRPublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
ROLL, District Judge.
Pending before the Court are Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction and for Failure to State a Claim Upon Which Relief Can Be Granted, Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment and Plaintiffs Writ of Mandamus in the Form of a Complaint. Although titled as a motion, Plaintiff states in his “Response to the March 6, 2000 Order of the Honorable James C. Carruth” that his motion for summary judgment is his response to Defendant’s motion to dismiss. 1 Accordingly, the Court construes Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment as his response to…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Landgraf v. USI Film ProductsSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Cato v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
- Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1995
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Stockton v. State Taxation & Revenue DepartmentNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2007
- United States v. Estate of Albert ChicorelCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2018