Legal Opinion
At & T Communications of California, Inc. v. Pacific Bell
District Court, N.D. California
Decided June 24, 1999No. C-98-4368-CALPublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER: DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS AND PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO CONFIRM ARBITRATION AWARD
LEGGE, District Judge.
Plaintiff AT & T Communications of California brings this action, and makes the present motion, to confirm an arbitration award in its favor against defendant Pacific Bell. Plaintiff asks this court to: confirm the award on the issue of liability, compel defendant to proceed with arbitration of damages, and enjoin defendant from proceeding before the California Public Utilities Commission.
Defendant moves to dismiss on two grounds. First, Pacific Bell asserts that this court lacks…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Cort v. AshSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Scripps-Howard Radio, Inc. v. Federal Communications CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- General Atomic Co. v. United Nuclear Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Global Naps, Inc. v. Bell Atlantic-New Jersey, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2003
- Qwest Communications Corp. v. City of BerkeleyDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2001
- Law Offices of Curtis v. TRINKO, LLP v. BELL ATLANTIC CORP.District Court, S.D. New York · 2000
- Qwest Corp. v. Utah Telecommunications Open Infrastructure AgencyDistrict Court, D. Utah · 2006