Legal Opinion

Jewell Coke Co., Lp v. Arcelormittal USA, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Ohio

Decided December 27, 2010No. Case 1:10-CV-1946, 1:10-CV-362PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION & ORDER [Resolving Doc. No. 28]

JAMES S. GWIN, District Judge:

In this contract dispute, Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant Jewell Coke Company (“Jewell”) moves the Court to dismiss the counter-claim filed by the Defendant and Counter-Claimant, ArcelorMittal USA, Inc. (“ArcelorMittal USA”) under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. [Doc. 28-1.] ArcelorMittal USA opposes the motion. [Doc. 94.] Jewell has replied. [Doc. 114.]

For the following reasons, the Court DENIES Jewell’s motion to dismiss.

I. Background

In this contract…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  4. Lama Holding Co. v. Smith Barney Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1996
  5. Stanley Cohen, Gerald A. Garfinkle, Eastern Artists and Drafting Materials, Inc. v. Elliott Koenig, and Robert KoenigCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1994

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Roof Maxx Technologies LLC v. HolsingerDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2021
  2. Roof Maxx Technologies LLC v. RourkDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2021
  3. Roof Maxx Technologies LLC v. TabbertDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2021

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

Powered by the Exa API