Legal Opinion
Simpson v. Putnam County National Bank of Carmel
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided August 14, 2000No. 97 CIV. 6403(BDP)PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER
BARRINGTON D. PARKER, Jr., District Judge.
Plaintiff Richard Simpson (“Simpson") commenced this action on August 28, 1997, asserting claims against defendants under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act of 1970 (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq., and under state law for fraud, tortious interference with contract, intentional infliction of emotional distress, breach of contract, and civil conspiracy. This Court dismissed the action in a Memorandum Decision and Order dated September 22, 1998 on the ground that it was barred by the Rooker-Feldman…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. FeldmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Business Guides, Inc. v. Chromatic Communications Enterprises, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Schwartz v. Public AdministratorNew York Court of Appeals · 1969
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Baker v. Urban Outfitters, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2003
- Murawski v. PatakiDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2007
- Chien v. Skystar Bio Pharmaceutical Co.District Court, D. Connecticut · 2009
- Murray v. Administration for Children's ServicesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2007