Legal Opinion

Friedman v. Kantor

United States Court of International Trade

Decided August 11, 1997No. Court No. 96-07-01787PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*902OPINION

Introduction

Wallach, Judge:

Plaintiff Abraham Friedman brought this action pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. § 701 et seq. (1994), to compel Defendant agencies to assist him with his business difficulties in Mexico. Defendants moved to dismiss the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, lack of standing and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Plaintiff claims jurisdiction is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1581(i) (1994), but also requests that the case be transferred to a federal district court if this Court determines that it lacks…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Lujan v. National Wildlife FederationSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
  2. Bennett v. SpearSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  3. United States v. SherwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
  4. Christianson v. Colt Industries Operating Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
  5. Heckler v. ChaneySupreme Court of the United States · 1985

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Friedman v. DaleyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
  2. Salmon Spawning & Recovery Alliance v. BashamUnited States Court of International Trade · 2007
  3. Salmon Spawning & Recovery Alliance v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2009
  4. Friedman v. DaleyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1999
  5. Southern Cross Seafoods, LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2023

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

Powered by the Exa API