Legal Opinion
Milam v. Herrlin
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided April 7, 1993No. 92 Civ. 5320 (RWS)PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SWEET, District Judge.
The defendants, Dr. John Herrlin (“Herrlin”), Rose Tulli (“Tulli”), and Metro-North Commuter Railroad (“Metro-North”) (collectively, the “Defendants”) have moved pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) and (6), Fed.R.Civ.P., for an order dismissing the Complaint of plaintiffs John V. Milam (“Milam”) and Vivian Milam (collectively, the “Plaintiffs”) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
The Plaintiffs have moved pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447 for an order remanding this action to the New York State Supreme Court…
2Cases cited44 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Hishon v. King & SpaldingSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- San Diego Building Trades Council v. GarmonSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- H. J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Wahlstrom v. Metro-North Commuter RailroadDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2000
- Mohamed v. Marriott International, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1995
- Gerzog v. London Fog Corp.District Court, E.D. New York · 1995
- Santiago v. Greyhound Lines, Inc.District Court, N.D. New York · 1997
- Ello v. SinghDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2007
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.