Legal Opinion
Griffioen v. Cedar Rapids & Iowa City Railway Co.
District Court, N.D. Iowa
Decided September 18, 2013No. C13-0066 EJMPublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
EDWARD J. McMANUS, District Judge.
This matter is before the court on:
*9051. Plaintiffs’ resisted Motion to Remand, filed July 30, 2013;
2. Defendant Union Pacific Corporation’s resisted Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction under Fed.R.Civ. Pro. 12(b)(2), filed August 14, 2013, and
3. Defendants’ Union Pacific Railway Company and Union Pacific Corporation (collectively “Union Pacific”) resisted Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings under Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 12(c), also filed August 14, 2013;
Briefing concluded September 14, 2013. Motion to remand denied. Motion to dismiss for…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- United Mine Workers of America v. GibbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Carnegie-Mellon University v. CohillSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- City of Chicago v. International College of SurgeonsSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Beneficial National Bank v. AndersonSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Mark Griffioen, Joyce Ludvicek, Mike Ludvicek, Sandra Skelton, and Brian Vanous, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Cedar Rapids and Iowa City Railway Company, Alliant Energy Corporation, Union Pacific Railroad Company, and Union Pacific Corporation.Supreme Court of Iowa · 2018
- Mark Griffioen, Joyce Ludvicek, Mike Ludvicek, Sandra Skelton, and Brian Vanous, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Cedar Rapids and Iowa City Railway Company, Alliant Energy Corporation, Union Pacific Railroad Company, and Union Pacific Corporation.Supreme Court of Iowa · 2018